(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "North Carolina courts : annual report of the Administrative Office of the Courts"

)U5 
C.3 



^ovt\\ (Earolma (Enurte 



o 

— i 



o 



OT 



3 



.>■ 



CO 

GO 

'CO 



p 

O 

c 
S 

rr. 

-h 
CO 



1986-87 




JVttmral Report 

of t\\e 

^mmtstrattOe Office of % (Eourts 



The Cover: The Johnston County Courthouse in Smithfield, North Carolina, is represen- 
tative of the Neo-Classical Revival at its most monumental scale. This courthouse was 
completed in 1921. The cut stone veneered structure is rectangular in shape, three stories 
high, and is fronted hy a four-columned portico. The level roofline is defined by a stone 
balustrade. Johnston County is located in the central region of the State. Smithfield was 
established as the county seat in 1777. 



NORTH CAROLINA COURTS 



1986-87 




ANNUAL REPORT 



of the 



ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 




ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

JUSTICE BUILDING 
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 



The Honorable James G. Exum, Jr., Chief Justice 
The Supreme Court of North Carolina 
Raleigh, North Carolina 

Dear Mr. Chief Justice: 

In accord with Section 7A-343 of the North Carolina General Statutes, I herewith transmit the 
Twenty-first Annual Report of the Administrative Office of the Courts, relating to the fiscal year, July 1, 
1986 — June 30, 1987. 

Fiscal year 1986-87 marks the third consecutive year with significant increases in filings and dispositions 
in both the Superior and District Courts. During 1986-87, as compared to 1985-86, total case filings 
increased by 8.3% in Superior Court and by 1 1.1% in District Court; dispositions increased by 9.3% in 
Superior Court and by 9.9% in District Court. Because total filings were greater than total dispositions, 
more cases were pending at the end of the fiscal year than were pending at the beginning. 

Appreciation is expressed to the many persons who participated in the data reporting, compilation, and 
writing required to produce this annual report. Within the Administrative Office of the Courts, principal 
responsibilities were shared by the Research and Planning Division and the Information Services Division. 
The principal burden of reporting the great mass of trial court data rested upon the offices of the clerks of 
superior court located in each of the one hundred counties of the State. The Clerk of the Supreme Court 
and the Clerk of the Court of Appeals provided the case data relating to our appellate courts. 

Without the responsible work of many persons across the State this report would not have been possible. 

Respectfully submitted, 




U<uJkiL: 



Franklin Freeman, Jr. 
Director 




February, 1988 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2012 with funding from 

LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation 



http://archive.org/details/northcarolinacou1987nort 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Parti 
The 1986-87 Judicial Year in Review 

The 1986-87 Judicial Year in Review 1 

Part II 

Court System Organization and Operations in 1986-87 

Historical Development of the North Carolina Court System 5 

The Present Court System 8 

Organization and Operations 

The Supreme Court 12 

The Court of Appeals 24 

The Superior Courts 32 

The District Courts 35 

District Attorneys 38 

Clerks of Superior Court 41 

Juvenile Services Division 43 

Public Defenders 45 

Appellate Defender 46 

The N.C. Courts Commission 47 

The Judicial Standards Commission 49 

Part III 
Court Resources in 1986-87 

Judicial Department Finances 

Appropriations 53 

Expenditures 56 

Receipts 58 

Distribution of Receipts 59 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 62 

Judicial Department Personnel 70 

Part IV 

Trial Courts Caseflow Data in 1986-87 

Trial Courts Case Data 73 

Superior Court Division Caseflow Data 77 

District Court Division Caseflow Data 137 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

Part II 
Court System Organization and Operations in 1986-87 

Original Jurisdictions and Routes of Appeal in the 

Present Court System 8 

Principal Administrative Authorities for North Carolina 

Trial Courts 11 

The Supreme Court of North Carolina 12 

Supreme Court. Caseload Inventory 14 

Supreme Court. Appeals Filed 15 

Supreme Court. Petitions Filed 15 

Supreme Court. Caseload Types 16 

Supreme Court, Submission of Cases to Decision Stage 17 

Supreme Court, Disposition of Petitions and Other Proceedings 17 

Supreme Court, Disposition of Appeals 18 

Supreme Court, Manner of Disposition of Appeals 19 

Supreme Court, Type of Disposition of Petitions 19 

Supreme Court, Pending Cases 20 

Supreme Court, Appeals Docketed and Disposed of, 

1980-81 — 1986-87 21 

Supreme Court, Petitions Docketed and Allowed, 

1980-81 — 1986-87 22 

Supreme Court, Processing Time for Disposed Cases 23 

The Court of Appeals of North Carolina 24 

Court of Appeals, Filings and Dispositions 26 

Court of Appeals, Inventory of Cases Appealed 27 

Court of Appeals, Manner of Disposition of Cases 28 

Court of Appeals, Inventory of Motions and Petitions 29 

Court of Appeals, Filings and Dispositions, 1981 — 1986-87 30 

Map of Judicial Divisions and Districts 31 

Judges of Superior Court 32 

District Court Judges 35 

District Attorneys 38 

Clerks of Superior Court 41 

Chief Court Counselors 44 

Public Defenders 45 

Appellate Defenders 46 

The N.C. Courts Commission 47 

The Judicial Standards Commission 49 

Part III 
Court Resources in 1986-87 

General Fund Appropriations, All State Agencies 

and Judicial Department 53 

General Fund Appropriations, All State Agencies 

and Judicial Department 54 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses of All 

State Agencies and Judicial Department 55 

General Fund Expenditures for Judicial Department Operations 56 

Judicial Department Receipts 58 

Distribution of Judicial Department Receipts 59 

Amounts of Fees, Fines, and Forfeitures Collected by the 

Courts and Distributed to Counties and Municipalities 60 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 63 

Mental Hospital Commitment Hearings 64 

Assigned Counsel, Cases and Expenditures 65 

Judicial Department Personnel 70 



Part IV 

Trial Courts Caseflow Data in 1986-87 

Caseload Trends 78 

Caseload 79 

Median Ages of Cases 80 

Civil Cases Trends 81 

Civil Case Filings By Case-Type 82 

Civil Cases Inventory 83 

Civil Cases, Manner of Disposition 87 

Civil Cases, Manner of Disposition, By County 88 

Ages of Civil Cases Pending 92 

Ages of Civil Cases Disposed 96 

Trends in Estates and Special Proceedings 100 

Filings and Dispositions For Estates and Special Proceedings 101 

Trends in Criminal Cases 105 

Criminal Case Filings By Case-Type 106 

Inventory of Criminal Cases 107 

Manner of Disposition of Felonies Ill 

Manner of Disposition of Felonies, By County 112 

Manner of Disposition of Misdemeanors 116 

Manner of Disposition of Misdemeanors, By County 117 

Ages of Criminal Cases Pending 121 

Ages of Criminal Cases Disposed 128 

District Courts, Filings and Dispositions 139 

District Courts, Filing and Disposition Trends of All Cases 140 

District Courts, Filing and Disposition Trends of Civil Cases 141 

District Courts, Civil Non-Magistrate Cases 142 

District Courts, Civil Non-Magistrate Filings By Case-Type 143 

District Courts, Civil Caseload Inventory 144 

District Courts, Manner of Disposition of Civil Cases 148 

District Courts, Manner of Disposition of Civil Cases, By County 149 

District Courts, Ages of Domestic Relations Cases Pending 156 

District Courts, Ages of Domestic Relations Cases Disposed 160 

District Courts, Ages of General Civil and Magistrate Appeal/ Transfer Cases Pending 164 

District Courts, Ages of General Civil and Magistrate Appeal/ Transfer Cases Disposed 168 

District Courts, Civil Magistrate Filings and Dispositions 172 



Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 
Superior Courts 



in 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

District Courts. Matters Alleged in Juvenile Petitions 174 

District Courts, Adjudicatory Hearings For Juvenile Matters 178 

District Courts, Trends of Criminal Cases 183 

District Courts. Motor Vehicle Criminal Case Filings and Dispositions 184 

District Courts. Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Caseload Inventory 188 

District Courts, Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Manner of Disposition 192 

District Courts, Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Manner of Disposition, By County 193 

District Courts, Ages of Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases Pending 197 

District Courts. Ages of Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases Disposed 201 

District Courts. Infraction Case Filings and Dispositions 205 



IV 



PARTI 



THE 1986-1987 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



THE 1986-87 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



This Annual Report on the work of North Carolina's 
Judicial Department is for the fiscal year which began 
July 1, 1986 and ended June 30, 1987. 

The Workload of the Courts 

Case filings in the Supreme Court totaled 196 com- 
pared with 209 filed during 1985-86. A total of 674 peti- 
tions were filed in the Supreme Court, compared with 733 
in 1985-86; and 99 petitions were allowed, compared with 
129 in 1985-86. 

For the Court of Appeals for 1986-87, case filings were 
1,288 compared with 1,381 for the 1985-86 year. Petitions 
filed in 1986-87 totaled 458, compared with 546 during the 
1985-86 year. 

More detailed data on the appellate courts is included 
in Part II of this Annual Report. 

In the superior courts, case filings (civil and criminal) 
increased by 8.3% to a total of 98,886 in 1986-87, com- 
pared with 91,336 cases in 1985-86. Superior court case 
dispositions also increased, to a total of 96,308, compared 
with 88,089 in 1985-86. As case filings during the year 
exceeded case dispositions, the total number of cases 
pending at the end of the year increased by 2,578. 

Not including juvenile proceedings and mental hospital 
commitment hearings, the statewide total of district court 
filings (civil and criminal) during 1986-87 was 1,868,985, 
an increase of 186,664 (11.1%) from 1985-86 filings of 
1 ,682,32 1 cases. This total includes a new case category in 
the district courts: infractions. Effective September 1, 
1986, many minor traffic offenses were decriminalized 
and thereafter prosecuted as infractions. Infractions are 
defined as non-criminal violations of law, not punishable 
by imprisonment. Nearly all infraction offenses were clas- 
sified as criminal motor vehicle cases in prior years. Dur- 
ing 1986-87, a total of 486,994 infraction cases were filed 
along with a total of 488,494 criminal motor vehicle cases, 
for a combined total of 975,488 cases. This combined 
total is an increase of 136,320 cases (16.2%) above the 
839,168 criminal motor vehicle cases filed during 1985-86. 
During 1986-87, filings of criminal non-motor vehicle 
cases in the district courts increased by 22,292 (5.0%) to 
468,131, compared with 445,839 during 1985-86. Filings 
of civil magistrate cases in the district courts increased by 
21,41 1 (9.5%), to 247,455 during 1986-87 compared with 
226,044 during 1985-86. 

Operations of the superior and district courts are sum- 
marized in Part II of this Report, and detailed informa- 
tion on the caseloads in the 100 counties and 34 judicial 
districts is presented in Part IV. 

1987 Legislative Highlights 

Superior Court Redisricting 

Chapter 509 of the 1987 Session Laws rewrote G.S.. 
7A-41 pertaining to judicial districts for the superior 
courts. The new legislation is effective January 1 , 1 989 for 
administrative purposes and effective in 1988 for pur- 
poses of electing superior court judges. The result is to 



increase superior court judge districts from 34 to 60 for 
election purposes, and from 34 to 44 for administrative 
purposes only. Current superior court districts, 3, 4, 6, 8, 
16, 19 A, 20, 25, and 30 were divided into two districts each 
for court administration and election purposes; district 7 
was divided into two districts for administration purposes 
and into three districts for election purposes; district 12 
was divided into three districts for election purposes; and 
current single county districts 10, 14, 18, 21, and 26 were 
divided into two or more districts each for election pur- 
poses only. The existing eight special judge positions 
(appointed by the Governor for four year terms) were 
phased out, effective January 1, 1989, being replaced by 
regular superior court positions to be filled by election 
during 1988. (Two additional special judge positions were 
created by Chapter 509, but these are apparently to be 
replaced by regular resident judge positions in January 
1991.) The 1987 legislation on superior court redistricting 
is subject to review under the Federal Voting Rights Act 
of 1965, and the act was precleared by the United States 
Department of Justice on September 25, 1987. 

Judicial Selection Study Commission 

The 1987 General Assembly in Chapter 873 established 
the Judicial Selection Study Commission to "study the 
method of selecting judges in North Carolina and recom- 
mend any changes needed to improve the system." The 
Commission will have 20 members: four appointed by the 
Governor, four appointed by the Lieutenant Governor, 
four appointed by the Speaker of the House of Represen- 
tatives, four appointed by the Chief Justice, and four 
appointed by the Attorney General. The Lieutenant Gov- 
ernor and the Speaker of the House of Representatives 
each designates a cochairman of the Commission. The 
legislation further provides that the Commission is to 
report its findings and recommendations to the Gover- 
nor, the General Assembly, the Chief Justice, and the 
Attorney General by February 15, 1989. 

AOC Studies 

The 1987 General Assembly in Chapter 19 directed the 
Administrative Office of the Courts to conduct a study 
concerning the use of presentence reports by judges, 
addressing the following issues: ( 1 ) current use of present- 
ence reports; (2) when the reports should be prepared; (3) 
who should prepare them; (4) their contents; and (5) 
whether the presentence reports should be mandatory for 
any, or all, offenses. The Administrative Office of the 
Courts is to submit a written report to the General 
Assembly prior to the convening of the 1988 Session of 
the 1987 General Assembly. 

Chapter 738 directed the Administrative Office of the 
Courts to study the potential for receiving federal reim- 
bursement for the costs of administration of child support 
enforcement services. The results of this study are to be 
reported to the Joint Appropriations Committees on Jus- 
tice and Public Safety by May 1, 1988. 



THE 1986-87 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



Life Sentence Appeals 

G.S. 7A-27 was amended by Chapter 679 of the 1987 
Session Laws to provide that only persons sentenced to 
death or life imprisonment for first-degree murder are 
entitled to an automatic review of their conviction by 
the North Carolina Supreme Court. Appeals of life 
sentences in second-degree murder, rape and sex offense 
cases will now go to the Court of Appeals, and any 
further review of such cases by the Supreme Court will 
be discretionary rather than a matter of right. 

Appellate Reports 

Chapter 404 of the 1987 Session Laws amended G.S. 
7A-6 to authorize the Supreme Court to designate a 
commercial law publisher's reports and advance sheets 
as the official reports of the Appellate Division, and to 
authorize the Administrative Officer of the Courts to 
contract with a commercial law publisher to print and 
sell appellate reports and advance sheets. These author- 
izations are in addition to present statutory provisions 
in G.S. 7A-6 pertaining to publication of the appellate 
reports. 

Community Penalties Program 

Chapter 862 of the 1987 Session Laws transferred the 
Buncombe County Community Penalties Program and 
funds previously allocated to it to the Administrative 
Office of the Courts. (The Buncombe County program 
had been funded by grants from the Department of 
Crime Control and Public Safety and from local funds. 
Other community penalties programs will continue to 
be so funded.) The Buncombe program will now be 
under the supervision of the chief district judge for the 
28th District, and its employees will be state employees. 

Emergency Judges 

Chapter 738 of the 1987 Session Laws provides that 
trial judges with eight (instead of 12) years of service 
may become emergency judges. 

Worthless Check Jurisdiction 

Chapter 355 provides that the jurisdiction of magis- 
trates and clerks to accept written appearances, waiver 
of trial and plea of guilty in worthless check cases is 
increased to cases involving checks up to $1,000 (pre- 
viously S500); and magistrates may now hear and decide 
not guilty pleas in worthless check cases involving 
checks up to SI. 000. 

Jurors 

Chapter 702 enacted G.S. 9-2 to prohibit an employer 
from firing or demoting an employee because the 
employee was called for either petit or grand jury duty. 



The employee has the right to a court action for rein- 
statement and reasonable damage in the event an 
employer violates the new statute. 

Incompetence and Guardianship Laws Rewritten 

The product of over two years' work by a committee 
established jointly by the Administrative Office of the 
Courts and the Division of Social Services, a thorough 
rewrite of North Carolina's guardianship laws was 
enacted by the 1987 General Asembly. The new law 
(Chapter 550), codified in the General Statutes as 
Chapter 35A, entitled "Incompetence and Guardian- 
ship," replaces Chapters 33 and 35, and consolidates all 
statutory provisions for adjudicating a person to be 
incompetent, appointing and establishing the powers of 
guardians of incompetent persons and of minors, ac- 
counting by guardians, and managing the estates of 
wards. 

Salaries 

Funds were appropriated by the 1987 General As- 
sembly for a 10% pay raise for district court judges, and 
a 5% pay increase for other officials and employees of 
the Judicial Department. No funding for merit increases 
was provided. 

New Positions 

Judicial Department appropriations for fiscal year 
1987-88 provide the following new positions: two spe- 
cial superior court judgeships (effective August 1, 1987); 
five assistant district attorneys (one each for Districts 
11, 25, 27A, 27B, and 29); ten victim-witness coordina- 
tors and three secretaries for district attorneys; three 
assistant public defenders; two assistant appellate de- 
fenders; two magistrates; seven district court secretaries; 
30 deputy clerks of superior court; one trial court 
administrator; and 26 positions in the juvenile court 
counselor program. 

For the 1988-89 fiscal year, appropriations were pro- 
vided for the following new positions: eleven district 
court judgeships (to be filled in the 1988 general elec- 
tion for Districts 3, 5, 7, 10, 1 1, 16, 18, 19B, 21, 25, and 
26); one superior court judgeship to be filled in the 1988 
general election; five assistant district attorneys, three 
secretaries and ten victim-witness coordinators for dis- 
trict attorney offices; five magistrates; one court repor- 
ter; one deputy clerk; and ten secretarial positions. 

Total Appropriations 

The 1987 Session of the General Assembly approp- 
riated a total of $158,596,135 to the Judicial Depart- 
ment for the 1987-88 fiscal year. For the 1988-89 fiscal 
year, the total appropriated is $165,653,510, which is 
subject to revision by the 1988 legislative session. 



PART II 



COURT SYSTEM ORGANIZATION 
AND OPERATIONS 

• Historical Development of Court System 

• Present Court System 

• Organization and Operations in 1986-87 



HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COURT SYSTEM 



From its early colonial period North Carolina's judicial 
system has been the focus of periodic attention and adjust- 
ment. Through the years, there has been a repeated 
sequence of critical examination, proposals for reform, and 
finally the enactment of some reform measures. 

Colonial Period 

Around 1700 the royal governor established a General 
(or Supreme) Court for the colony and a dispute developed 
over the appointment of associate justices. The Assembly 
conceded to the King the right to name the chief justice but 
unsuccessfully tried to win for itself the power to appoint 
the associate justices. Other controversies developed con- 
cerning the creation and jurisdiction of the courts and the 
tenure of judges. As for the latter, the Assembly's position 
was that judge appointments should be for good behavior 
as against the royal governor's decision for life appoint- 
ment. State historians have noted that "the Assembly won 
its fight to establish courts and the judicial structure in the 
province was grounded on laws enacted by the legislature," 
which was more familiar with local conditions and needs 
(Lefler and Newsome, 142). Nevertheless, North Carolina 
alternated between periods under legislatively enacted 
reforms (like good behavior tenure and the Court Bill of 
1746, which contained the seeds of the post-Revolutionary 
court system) and periods of stalemate and anarchy after 
such enactments were nullified by royal authority. A more 
elaborate system was framed by legislation in 1767 to last 
five years. It was not renewed because of persisting dis- 
agreement between local and royal partisans. As a result, 
North Carolina was without higher courts until after Inde- 
pendence (Battle, 847). 

At the lower court level during the colonial period, judi- 
cial and county government administrative functions were 
combined in the authority of the justices of the peace, who 
were appointed by the royal governor. 

After the Revolution 

When North Carolina became a state in 1 776, the colon- 
ial structure of the court system was retained largely intact. 
The Courts of Pleas and Quarter Sessions — the county 
court which continued in use from about 1670 to 1868 
—were still held by the assembled justices of the peace in 
each county. The justices were appointed by the governor 
on the recommendation of the General Assembly, and they 
were paid out of fees charged litigants. On the lowest level 
of the judicial system, magistrate courts of limited jurisdic- 
tion were held by justices of the peace, singly or in pairs, 
while the county court was out of term. 

The new Constitution of 1776 empowered the General 
Assembly to appoint judges of the Supreme Court of Law 
and Equity. A court law enacted a year later authorized 
three superior court judges and created judicial districts. 
Sessions were supposed to be held in the court towns of 
each district twice a year, under a system much like the one 
that had expired in 1772. Just as there had been little 
distinction in terminology between General Court and 



Supreme Court prior to the Revolution, the terms Supreme 
Court and Superior Court were also interchangeable dur- 
ing the period immediately following the Revolution. 

One of the most vexing governmental problems con- 
fronting the new State of North Carolina was its judiciary. 
"From its inception in 1777 the state's judiciary caused 
complaint and demands for reform. "(Lefler and Newsome, 
291, 292). Infrequency of sessions, conflicting judge opin- 
ions, and insufficient number of judges, and lack of means 
for appeal were all cited as problems, although the greatest 
weakness was considered to be the lack of a real Supreme 
Court. 

In 1779, the legislature required the Superior Court 
judges to meet together in Raleigh as a Court of Conference 
to resolve cases which were disagreed on in the districts. 
This court was continued and made permanent by subse- 
quent laws. The justices were required to put their opinions 
in writing to be delivered orally in court. The Court of 
Conference was changed in name to the Supreme Court in 
1 805 and authorized to hear appeals in 1810. Because of the 
influence of the English legal system, however, there was 
still no conception of an alternative to judges sitting 
together to hear appeals from cases which they had them- 
selves heard in the districts in panels of as few as two judges 
(Battle, 848). In 1818, though, an independent three-judge 
Supreme Court was created for review of cases decided at 
the Superior Court level. 

Meanwhile, semi-annual superior court sessions in each 
county were made mandatory in 1806, and the State was 
divided into six circuits, or ridings, where the six judges 
were to sit in rotation, two judges constituting a quorum as 
before. 

The County Court of justices of the peace continued 
during this period as the lowest court and as the agency of 
local government. 

After the Civil War 

Major changes to modernize the judiciary and make it 
more democratic were made in 1868. A primary holdover 
from the English legal arrangement - the distinction 
between law and equity proceedings — was abolished. The 
County Court's control of local government was abolished. 
Capital offenses were limited to murder, arson, burglary 
and rape, and the Constitution stated that the aim of 
punishment was "not only to satisfy justice, but also to 
reform the offender, and thus prevent crime". The member- 
ship of the Supreme Court was raised to five, and the 
selection of the justices (including the designation of the 
chief justice) and superior court judges (raised in number to 
12) was taken from the legislature and given to the voters, 
although vacancies were to be filled by the governor until 
the next election. The Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions 
- The County Court of which three justices of the peace 
constituted a quorum - - was eliminated. Its judicial 
responsibilities were divided between the Superior Courts 
and the individual justices of the peace, who were retained 
as separate judicial officers with limited jurisdiction. 



HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COURT SYSTEM 



Conservatively oriented amendments to the 1868 
Constitution in 1875 reduced the number of Supreme 
Court justices to three and the Superior Court judges to 
nine. The General Assembly was given the power to 
appoint justices of the peace, instead of the governor. 
Most of the modernizing changes in the post-Civil War 
Constitution, however, were left, and the judicial struc- 
ture it had established continued without systematic 
modification through more than half of the 20th cen- 
tury. (A further constitutional amendment approved by 
the voters in November, 1888, returned the Supreme 
Court membership to five, and the number of superior 
court judges to twelve.) 

Before Reorganization 

A multitude of legislative enactments to meet rising 
demands and to respond to changing needs had heavily 
encumbered the 1868 judicial structure by the time sys- 
tematic court reforms were proposed in the 1950's. This 
accrual of piecemeal change and addition to the court 
system was most evident at the lower, local court level, 
where hundreds of courts specially created by statute 
operated with widely dissimilar structure and jurisdiction. 

By 1965, when the implementation of the most recent 
major reforms was begun, the court system in North 
Carolina consisted of four levels: (a) the Supreme Court, 
with appellate jurisdiction; (b) the superior court, with 
general trial jurisdiction; (c) the local statutory courts 
of limited jurisdiction, and (d) justices of the peace and 
mayor's courts, with petty jurisdiction. 

At the superior court level, the State had been divided 
into 30 judicial districts and 21 solicitorial districts. The 
38 superior court judges (who rotated among the coun- 
ties) and the district solicitors were paid by the State. 
The clerk of superior court, who was judge of probate 
and often also a juvenile judge, was a county official. 
There were specialized branches of superior court in 
some counties for matters like domestic relations and 
juvenile offenses. 

The lower two levels were local courts. At the higher 
of these local court levels were more than 180 recorder- 
type courts. Among these were the county recorder's 
courts, municipal recorder's courts and township re- 
corder's courts; the general county courts, county crim- 
inal courts and special county courts; the domestic rela- 
tions courts and the juvenile courts. Some of these had 
been established individually by special legislative acts 
more than a half-century earlier. Others had been created 
by general law across the State since 1919. About half 
were county courts and half were city or township 
courts. Jurisdiction included misdemeanors (mostly 
traffic offenses), preliminary hearings and sometimes 
civil matters. The judges, who were usually part-time, 
were variously elected or appointed locally. 

At the lowest level were about 90 mayor's courts and 
some 925 justices of the peace. These officers had sim- 
ilar criminal jurisdiction over minor cases with penalties 
up to a S50 fine or 30 days in jail. The justices of the 



peace also had civil jurisdiction of minor cases. These 
court officials were compensated by the fees they 
exacted, and they provided their own facilities. 

Court Reorganization 

The need for a comprehensive evaluation and revi- 
sion of the court system received the attention and sup- 
port of Governor Luther H. Hodges in 1957, who 
encouraged the leadership of the North Carolina Bar 
Association to pursue the matter. A Court Study Com- 
mittee was established as an agency of the North Carol- 
ina Bar Association, and that Committee issued its 
report, calling for reorganization, at the end of 1958. A 
legislative Constitutional Commission, which worked 
with the Court Study Committee, finished its report 
early the next year. Both groups called for the structur- 
ing of an all-inclusive court system which would be 
directly state-operated, uniform in its organization 
throughout the State and centralized in its administra- 
tion. The plan was for a simplified, streamlined and 
unified structure. A particularly important part of the 
proposal was the elimination of the local satutory courts 
and their replacement by a single District Court; the 
office of justice of the peace was to be abolished, and 
the newly fashioned position of magistrate would func- 
tion within the District Court as a subordinate judicial 
office. 

Constitutional amendments were introduced in the 
legislature in 1959 but these failed to gain the required 
three-fifths vote of each house. The proposals were 
reintroduced and approved at the 1961 session. The 
Constitutional amendments were approved by popular 
vote in 1962, and three years later the General Assem- 
bly enacted statutes to put the system into effect by 
stages. By the end of 1970 all of the counties and their 
courts had been incorporated into the new system, 
whose unitary nature was symbolized by the name, 
General Court of Justice. The designation of the entire 
20th century judicial system as a single, statewide 
"court," with components for various types and levels 
of caseload, was adapted from North Carolina's earlier 
General Court, whose full venue extended to all of the 
17th century counties. 

After Reorganization 

Notwithstanding the comprehensive reorganization 
adopted in 1962, the impetus for changes has con- 
tinued. In 1965, the Constitution was amended to pro- 
vide for the creation of an intermediate Court of 
Appeals. It was amended again in 1972 to allow for the 
Supreme Court to censure or remove judges upon the 
recommendation of a Judicial Standards Commission. 
As for the selection of judges, persistent efforts were 
made in the 1970's to obtain legislative approval of 
amendments to the State Constitution, to appoint judges 
according to "merit" instead of electing them by popu- 
lar, partisan vote. The proposed amendments received 



HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COURT SYSTEM 

the backing of a majority of the members of each Hinsdale, C. E., County Government in North Carolina. 1965 

house, but not the three-fifths required to submit con- Edition. 

. . r i i t Lefler, Hugh Talmage and Albert Ray Newsome, North Carolina: 

stitutional amendments to a vote of the people. It seems The History ofa Southern State , , 963 Edition . 

likely that this significant issue will be before the Sanders, John L., Constitutional Revision and Court Reform: A 

General Assembly again for consideration. Legislative History. 1959 Special Report of the N.C. Institute of 

Government. 
Major Sources Stevenson, George and Ruby D. Arnold, North Carolina Courts of 

Battle, Kemp P., An Address on the History of the Supreme Court Law and Equity Prior to 1868. N.C. Archives Information Circular 

(Delivered in 1888). 1 North Carolina Reports 835-876. 1973. 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 
Original Jurisdiction and Routes of Appeal 



Recommendations 

from Judicial 

Standards Commission 



Original Jurisdiction 
All felony cases; civil 
cases in excess of 
SI 0.000* 




SUPERIOR 
COURTS 

72 Judges 




Final Order of i 
Utilities Commission in 
General Rate Case 



COURT OF 
APPEALS 

/ 2 Judges 



Decisions of 

Most Administrative 

Agencies 



Original Jurisdiction 
Probate and estates, 
special proceedings 
'condemnations, 
adoptions, partitions, 
foreclosures, etcj 



\2) 

\l 



criminal cases 
(for trial de novo) 



civil cases 
I 



DISTRICT 
COURTS 

151 Judges 



Clerks of Superior 
Court 

(100) 



Magistrates 

(637) 



Decisions of Industrial 

Commission, State Bar, 

Property Tax Commission, 

Commissioner of Insurance, 

Bd. of State Contract Appeals 



Original Jurisdiction 
Misdemeanor cases not 
assigned to magistrates; 
probable cause hearings; 
civil cases $10,000* or 
less; juvenile proceedings; 
domestic relations; 
involuntary commitments 



Original Jurisdiction 
Accept certain misdemeanor 
guilty pleas: worthless check 
misdemeanors $1,000** or less; 
small claims $1,500 or less 



( 1 ) Appeals from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court are by right in Utilities Commission general rate cases, cases involving comstitutional 
questions, and cases in which there has been dissent in the Court of Appeals. In its discretion, the Supreme Court may review Court of Appeals 
decisions in cases of significant public interest or cases involving legal principles of major significance. 

(2) Appeals from these agencies lie directly to the Court of Appeals. 

(3; As a matter of right, appeals go directly to the Supreme Court in criminal cases in which the defendent has been sentenced to death or life 
imprisonment, and in civil cases involving the involuntary annexation of territory by a municipality of 5,000 or more population. In all other cases 
appeal as of right is to the Court of Appeals. In its discretion, the Supreme Court may hear appeals directly from the trial courts in cases where delay 
would cause substantial harm or the Court of Appeals docket is unusually full. (Under G.S. 7A-27, effective July 24, 1987, appeals in criminal cases 
as a matter of right are limited to first degree murder cases in which there is a sentence of death or life imprisonment.) 

*The district and superiorcourts have concurrent original jurisdiction in civil actions (G.S. 7A-242). However, the district court division is \Mt proper 
division for the trial of civil actions in which the amount in controversy is $10,000 or less; and the superior court division is the proper division for the 
trial of civil actions in which the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000 (G.S. 7A-243). 
"Magistrate jurisdiction in worthless check cases increased from $500 to $1,000 effective October I, 1987 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 



Article IV of the North Carolina Constitution estab- 
lishes the General Court of Justice which "shall constitute 
a unified judicial system for purposes of jurisdiction, 
operation, and administration, and shall consist of an 
Appellate Division, a Superior Court Division, and a 
District Court Division." 

The Appellate Division is comprised of the Supreme 
Court and the Court of Appeals. 

The Superior Court Division is comprised of the super- 
ior courts which hold sessions in the county seats of the 
100 counties of the State. The counties are grouped into 
judicial districts (34 at the present time), and one or more 
superior court judges are elected for each of the judicial 
districts. A clerk of the superior court for each county is 
elected by the voters of the county. 

The District Court Division is comprised of the district 
courts. The General Assembly is authorized to divide the 
State into a convenient number of local court districts and 
prescribe where the district courts shall sit, but district 
court must sit in at least one place in each county. The 
General Assembly has provided that districts for pur- 
poses of the district court are coterminous with superior 
court judicial districts. The Constitution also provides for 
one or more magistrates to be appointed in each county 
"who shall be officers of the district court." 

The State Constitution (Art. IV, Sec. 1) also contains 
the term, "judicial department," stating that "The General 
Assembly shall have no power to deprive the judicial 
department of any power or jurisdiction that rightfully 
pertains to it as a co-ordinate department of the govern- 
ment, nor shall it establish or authorize any courts other 
than as permitted by this Article." The terms, "General 
Court of Justice" and "Judicial Department" are almost, 
but not quite, synonymous. It may be said that the Judi- 
cial Department encompasses all of the levels of court 
designated as the General Court of Justice plus all admin- 
istrative and ancillary services within the Judicial Depart- 
ment. 

The original jurisdictions and routes of appeal between 
the several levels of court in North Carolina's system of 
courts are illustrated in the chart on the opposite page. 

Criminal Cases 

Trial of misdemeanor cases is within the original juris- 
diction of the district courts. Some misdemeanor offenses 
are tried by magistrates, who are also empowered to 
accept pleas of guilty to certain offenses and impose fines 
in accordance with a schedule set by the Conference of 
Chief District Court Judges. Most trials of misdemeanors 
are by district court judges, who also hold preliminary, 
"probable cause" hearings in felony cases. Trial of felony 
cases is within the jurisdiction of the superior courts. 

Decisions of magistrates may be appealed to the district 
court judge. In criminal cases there is no trial by jury 
available at the district court level; appeal from the dis- 
trict courts' judgments in criminal cases is to the superior 
courts for trial de novo before a jury. Except in life- 
imprisonment or death sentence cases (which are appealed 



to the Supreme Court), appeal from the superior courts is 
to the Court of Appeals. 

Civil Cases 

The 100 clerks of superior court are ex officio judges of 
probate and have original jurisdiction in probate and 
estates matters. The clerks also have jurisdiction over 
such special proceedings as adoptions, partitions, con- 
demnations under the authority of eminent domain, and 
foreclosures. Rulings of the clerk may be appealed to the 
superior court. 

The district courts have original jurisdiction in juvenile 
proceedings, domestic relations cases, petitions for invol- 
untary commitment to a mental hospital, and are the 
"proper" courts for general civil cases where the amount 
in controversy is $10,000 or less. If the amount in con- 
troversy is $1,500 or less and the plaintiff in the case so 
requests, the chief district court judge may assign the case 
for initial hearing by a magistrate. Magistrates' decisions 
may be appealed to the district court. Trial by jury for 
civil cases is available in the district courts; appeal from 
the judgment of a district court in a civil case is to the 
North Carolina Court of Appeals. 

The superior courts are the proper courts for trial of 
general civil cases where the amount in controversy is 
more than $10,000. Appeals from decisions of most 
administrative agencies are first within the jurisdiction of 
the superior courts. Appeal from the superior courts in 
civil cases is to the Court of Appeals. 

Administration 

The North Carolina Supreme Court has the "general 
power to supervise and control the proceedings of any of 
the other courts of the General Court of Justice." (G.S. 
7A-32(b)). 

In addition to this grant of general supervisory power, 
the North Carolina General Statutes provide certain 
Judicial Department officials with specific powers and 
responsibilities for the operation of the court system. The 
Supreme Court has the responsibility for prescribing 
rules of practice and procedures for the appellate courts 
and for prescribing rules for the trial courts to supplement 
those prescribed by statute. The Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court designates one of the judges of the Court 
of Appeals to be its Chief Judge, who in turn is responsi- 
ble for scheduling the sessions of the Court of Appeals. 

The chart on page 1 1 illustrates specific responsibilities 
for administration of the trial courts vested in Judicial 
Department officials by statute. The Chief Justice 
appoints the Director and an Assistant Director of the 
Administrative Office of the Courts; this Assistant Direc- 
tor also serves as the Chief Justice's administrative assist- 
ant. The schedule of sessions of superior court in the 100 
counties is set by the Supreme Court; assignment of the 
State's rotating superior court judges is the responsibility 
of the Chief Justice. Finally, the Chief Justice designates a 
chief district court judge for each of the State's 34 judicial 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 



districts from among the elected district court judges of 
the respective districts. These judges have responsibilities 
for the scheduling of the district courts and magistrates' 
courts within their respective districts, along with other 
administrative responsibilities. 

The Administrative Office of the Courts is responsible 
for direction of non-judicial, administrative and business 
affairs of the Judicial Department. Included among its 
functions are fiscal management, personnel services, 
information and statistical services, supervision of record 
keeping in the trial court clerks' offices, liaison with the 
legislative and executive departments of government, 
court facility evaluation, purchase and contract, educa- 
tion and training, coordination of the program for provi- 
sion of legal counsel to indigent persons, juvenile proba- 



tion and after-care, trial court administrator services, 
planning, and general administrative services. 

The clerk of superior court in each county acts as clerk 
for both the superior and district courts. Until 1980, the 
clerk also served as chairman of the county's calendar 
committee, which set the civil case calendars. Effective 
July 1, 1980, these committees were eliminated; day-to- 
day calendaring of civil cases is now done by the clerk of 
superior court or by a "trial court administrator" in some 
districts, under the supervision of the senior resident 
superior court judge and chief district court judge. The 
criminal case calendars in both superior and district 
courts are set by the district attorney of the respective 
district. 



10 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 

Principal Administrative Authorities for North Carolina Trial Courts 



(34) Senior Resident 

Judges; (100) Clerks 

of Superior Court 

SUPERIOR 
COURTS 




CHIEF JUSTICE 

and 

SUPREME COURT 



2 

i 



Administrative 

Office of 

the Courts 



(35) District 
Attorneys 




(34) Chief District 
Court Judges 

DISTRICT 
COURTS 



'The Supreme Court has general supervisory authority over the operations of the superior courts (as well as other trial 
courts). The schedule of superior courts is approved by the Supreme Court; assignments of superior court judges, who 
rotate from district to district, are the responsibility of the Chief Justice. 

2 The Director and an Assistant Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts are appointed by and serve at the 
pleasure of the Chief Justice. 

3 The Supreme Court has general supervisory authority over the operations of the district courts (as well as other trial 
courts). The Chief Justice appoints a chief district court judge in each of the 34judicial districts from thejudges elected in 
the respective districts. 

4 The Administrative Office of the Courts is empowered to prescribe a variety of rules governing the operation of the 
offices of the 100 clerks of superior court, and to obtain statistical data and other information from officials in the 
Judicial Department. 

5 The district attorney sets the criminal-case trial calendars. In each district, the senior resident superior court judge and 
the chief district court judge are empowered to supervise the calendaring procedures for civil cases in their respective 
courts. 

6 In addition to certain judicial functions, the clerk of superior court performs administrative, fiscal and record-keeping 
functions for both the superior court and district court of his county. Magistrates, who serve under the supervision of the 
chief district court judge, are appointed by the senior resident superior court judge from nominees submitted by the clerk 
of superior court. 



11 



THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA* 



Chief Justice 
JAMES G. EXUM, JR. 



LOUIS B. MEYER 
BURLEY B. MITCHELL, JR. 
HARRY C. MARTIN 



Associate Justices 



HENRY E. FRYE 

JOHN WEBB 

WILLIS P. WHICHARD 



Retired Chief Justices 

WILLIAM H. BOBBITT 

SUSIE SHARP 

JOSEPH BRANCH 



Retired Justices 



I. BEVERLY LAKE 
J. FRANK HUSKINS 



DAVID M. BRITT 
J. WILLIAM COPELAND 



Clerk 
J. Gregory Wallace 



Librarian 
Frances H. Hall 



*Asof30 June 1987. 



12 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



The Supreme Court 



At the apex of the North Carolina court system is the 
seven-member Supreme Court, which sits in Raleigh to 
consider and decide questions of law presented in civil 
and criminal cases on appeal. The Chief Justice and six 
associate justices are elected to eight-year terms by the 
voters of the State. There are two terms of the Supreme 
Court each year: a Spring Term commencing on the first 
Tuesday in February and a Fall Term commencing on the 
first Tuesday in September. The Court does not sit in 
panels. It sits only en banc, that is, all members sitting on 
each case. 

Jurisdiction 

The only original case jurisdiction exercised by the 
Supreme Court is in the censure and removal of judges 
upon the (non-binding) recommendations of the Judicial 
Standards Commission. The Court's appellate jurisdic- 
tion includes: 

- cases on appeal by right from the Court of Appeals 
(cases involving substantial constitutional ques- 
tions and cases in which there has been dissent in 
the Court of Appeals); 

- cases on appeal by right from the Utilities Commis- 
sion (cases involving final order or decision in a 
general rate matter); 

- criminal cases on appeal by right from the superior 
courts (cases in which the defendant has been sen- 
tenced to death or life imprisonment); and 

- cases in which review has been granted in the 
Supreme Court's discretion. 

Discretionary review by the Supreme Court directly 
from the trial courts may be granted when delay would 
likely cause subsantial harm or when the workload of the 
Appellate Division is such that the expeditious adminis- 
tration of justice requires it. However, most appeals are 
heard only after review by the Court of Appeals. 

Administration 

The Supreme Court has general power to supervise and 
control the proceedings of the other courts of the General 
Court of Justice. The Court has specific power to pre- 
scribe the rules of practice and procedure for the trial 
court divisions, consistent with any rules enacted by the 
General Assembly. The schedule of superior court ses- 
sions in the 100 counties is approved yearly, by the 
Supreme Court. The Clerk of the Supreme Court, the 
Librarian of the Supreme Court Library, and the Appel- 



late Division Reporter are appointed by the Supreme 
Court. 

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoints the 
Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts and 
an Assistant Director, who serve at the pleasure of the 
Chief Justice. He also designates a Chief Judge from 
among the judges of the Court of Appeals and a Chief 
District Court Judge from among the district judges in 
each of the State's 34judicial districts. He assigns superior 
court judges, who regularly rotate from district to district, 
to the scheduled sessions of superior court in the 100 
counties, and he is also empowered to transfer district 
court judges to other districts for temporary or special- 
ized duty. The Chief Justice appoints three of the seven 
members of the Judicial Standards Commission — a judge 
of the Court of Appeals who serves as the Commission's 
chairman, one superior court judge and one district court 
judge. The Chief Justice also appoints six of the 24 voting 
members of the N.C. Courts Commission: one associate 
justice of the Supreme Court; one Court of Appeals 
judge; two superior court judges; and two district court 
judges. The Chief Justice also appoints the Appellate 
Defender, and the Chief Hearing Officer of the Office of 
Administrative Hearings. 

Expenses of the Court, 1986-87 

Operating expenses of the Supreme Court during the 
1986-87 fiscal year amounted to $2, 28 1,1 61, an increase of 
10.6% over total 1985-86 expenditures of $2,063,229. 
Expenditures for the Supreme Court during 1986-87 con- 
stituted 1.5% of all General Fund expenditures for the 
operation of the entire Judicial Department during the 
fiscal year. 

Case Data, 1986-87 

A total of 364 appealed cases were before the Supreme 
Court during the fiscal year, 168 that were pending on 
July 1, 1986 plus 196 cases filed through June 30, 1987. A 
total of 200 of these cases were disposed of, leaving 164 
cases pending on June 30, 1987. 

A total of 80 1 petitions (requests to appeal) were before 
the Court during the 1986-87 year, with 635 disposed 
during the year and 166 pending as of June 30, 1987. The 
Court granted 99 petitions for review during 1986-87 
compared to 129 for 1985-86. 

More detailed data on the Court's workload is pres- 
ented on the following pages. 



13 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 

Supreme Court Caseload Inventory 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 



Petitions for Review 

Civil domestic 

Juvenile 

Other civil 

Criminal 

Postconviction remedy 

Administrative agency decision 

Total Petitions for Review 



Pending 






Pending 


7/1/86 


Filed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


3 


24 


22 


5 


2 


4 


5 


1 


63 


269 


269 


63 


39 


316 


277 


78 


14 


29 


33 


10 


6 


32 


29 


9 



127 



674 



635 



166 



Appeals 

Civil domestic 

Petitions for review granted that became civil domestic appeals 

Juvenile 

Petitions for review granted that became juvenile appeals 

Other civil 

Petitions for review granted that became other civil appeals 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to death 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to life imprisonment 

Other criminal 

Petitions for review granted that became other criminal appeals 

Petitions for review granted that became postconviction 

remedy cases 
Administrative agency decision 
Petitions for review granted that became appeals of 

administrative agency decision 

Total Appeals 

Other Proceedings 

Rule 16(b) additional issues re dissent 

Extraordinary writs 

Requests for advisory opinion 

Rule amendments 

Motions 

Rule 31 Petitions to Rehear 

Total Other Proceedings 



2 





2 





1 


3 


2 


2 














1 


2 


3 





23 


29 


30 


22 


20 


31 


29 


22 


14 


17 


7 


24 


65 


78 


74 


69 


17 


8 


20 


5 


12 


17 


18 


11 














X 


6 


8 


6 


5 


5 


7 


3 


168 


196 


200 


164 





6 


6 





7 


44 


51 








2 


2 




















395 


395 








14 


13 


1 



461 



467 



14 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 1986-87 

APPEALS FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT 
JULY 1, 1986 - JUNE 30, 1987 



CRIMINAL-DEATH 



CRIMINAL LIFE 




OTHER CIVIL 



JUVENILE 1%(2) 

DOMESTIC RELATIONS 2% 

(3) 



OTHER CRIMINAL 



ADMIN. AGENCY 



PETITIONS FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT 
JULY 1, 1986 - JUNE 30, 1987 



OTHER CIVIL 



JUVENILE 1%(4) 



CRIMINAL 




ADMIN. AGENCY 

DOMESTIC RELATIONS 3% 

(24) 

POST-CONVICTION 



15 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 

Supreme Court Caseload Types by Judicial District and Division 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 



Judicial 


Judicial 


Total 


Death 


Life 


Other 


Civil 


Other 


Cases 


Division 


District 


Cases 


Cases 


Cases 


Criminal 


Cases 


Cases 


Disposed 


1 


1 


7 





3 


2 


2 





5 




2 


4 





2 


2 








1 




3A 


6 


1 


2 


1 


2 





2 




3B 


4 





1 


1 


2 





3 




4 


8 


2 


4 





1 


1 


2 




5 


7 


1 


3 


2 





1 


4 




6 


V 


3 


3 


2 


1 





3 




7 


5 


1 


2 


1 


1 





3 




s 


11 





7 


2 


2 





4 


SUBTOTAL 




61 


8 


27 


13 


11 


2 


27 


II 


9 


8 


1 


4 


2 


1 





5 




10 


63 


3 


7 


6 


26 


21 


32 




ll 


3 








1 


2 





1 




12 


20 


1 


13 


4 


2 





9 




13 


5 


2 


1 


1 


1 





2 




14 


17 


I 


6 


3 


3 


4 


7 




15A 


8 


1 


3 


2 


1 


1 


4 




15B 


11 





8 


1 


2 





5 




16 


18 


8 


6 


3 


1 





8 


SUBTOTAL 




153 


17 


48 


23 


39 


26 


73 


III 


17A 


7 


2 


2 





2 


1 


5 




17B 


6 


1 


1 


2 


2 





3 




18 


21 


1 


9 


2 


8 


1 


II 




19A 


8 


1 


6 





1 





6 




19B 


2 


1 


1 











2 




20 


10 


1 


3 


1 


5 





6 




21 


16 


1 


X 





7 





9 




22 


15 


4 


7 


1 


3 





3 




23 


n 


1 


5 


1 


4 





7 


SUBTOTAL 




96 


13 


42 


7 


32 


2 


52 


IV 


24 


3 





2 





1 





2 




25 


7 


1 


5 


1 








5 




26 


15 





4 


2 


8 


1 


11 




27A 


12 


1 


6 


3 


2 





7 




27B 


4 





3 





1 





2 




28 


14 


1 


7 


1 


4 


1 


7 




2') 


16 


3 


II 


1 


1 





9 




30 


10 





4 


3 


3 





5 


SUBTOTAL 




81 


6 


42 


11 


20 


2 


48 


TOTALS 




391 


44 


159 


54 


102 


32 


200 



NOTE: Above includes life and death sentence cases awaiting Record on Appeal and not yet formally docketed. 



16 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 

Submission of Cases Reaching Decision Stage in Supreme Court 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 



Cases Argued 

Civil 
Criminal 

Total cases argued 



76 
110 

186 



Submissions Without Argument 

By motion of the parties (Appellate Rule 30 (d)) 
By order of the Court (Appellate Rule 30 (f)) 

Total submissions without argument 

Total Cases Reaching Decision Stage 



I 
I 

2 
188 



Disposition of Petitions and Other Proceedings by the Supreme Court 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 



Petitions for Review 

Civil Domestic 

Juvenile 

Other Civil 

Criminal 

Postconviction Remedy 

Administrative Agency Decision 

Total Petitions for Review 







Dismissed/ 


Total 


Granted* 


Denied 


Withdrawn 


Disposed 


3 


19 





22 


1 


3 


1 


5 


38 


221 


10 


269 


49 


219 


9 


277 





22 


11 


33 


8 


20 


1 


29 


99 


504 


32 


635 



Other Proceedings 

Rule 16(b) — Additional Issues 
Extraordinary Writs 
Advisory Opinion 
Rule Amendments 
Motions 

Total Other Proceedings 

*"GRANTED" includes orders allowing relief without accepting the case as a full appeal 



3 


3 





6 


13 


M 


4 


51 

2 



395 

467 



17 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 
Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals With Signed Opinions 











Reversed 




Total 


Case Types 


Affirmed 


Modified 


Reversed 


Remanded 


Remanded 


Disposed 


Civil domestic 











3 





3 


Juvenile 








1 


1 





2 


Other civil 


15 


4 


5 


15 





39 


Criminal (death sentence) 


2 





1 


1 


3 


7 


Criminal (life sentence) 


52 





2 


14 


6 


74 


Other criminal 


8 


2 


4 


10 





24 


Postconviction remedy 




















Administrative agency decision 


5 





3 


3 





11 



Totals 



82 



16 



47 



160 



Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals with Per Curiam Decision 











Reversed 




Total 


Case Types 


Affirmed 


Modified 


Reversed 


Remanded 


Remanded 


Disposed 


Civil domestic 





1 











1 


Juvenile 


1 














1 


Other civil 


18 


1 











19 


Criminal (death sentence) 




















Criminal (life sentence) 




















Other criminal 


8 





1 


1 





10 


Postconviction remedy 




















Administrative agency decision 


3 


1 











4 



Totals 



30 



35 



Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals by Dismissal or Withdrawal 



Case Types 



Dismissed or 
Withdrawn 



Civil domestic 

Juvenile 

Other civil 

Criminal (death sentence) 

Criminal (life sentence) 

Other criminal 

Post-conviction remedy 

Administrative agency decision 



Totals 



IX 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 1986-87 

MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF APPEALS IN THE SUPREME COURT 

JULY 1, 1986-JUNE 30, 1987 



OPINIONS 




DISMISSED/WITHDRAWN 3% 

(5) 



PER CURIAM DECISIONS 



TYPE OF DISPOSITION OF PETITIONS FOR REVIEW IN THE SUPREME COURT 

JULY 1, 1986-JUNE 30, 1987 



GRANTED 



DENIED 




DISMISSED/ WITHDRAWN 





SX 




— _ 


B 


Eft 


s 




01 




't-i 


y 





c 


RI 


~ 


01 

a. 


u 



c .- *> 



T3 
4) 

3 

- ex 
u 

81 

01 



X 



41 2 J? "a 

a. q < 

c 



i 



Z 

c 
- 

PS 






o 

u 

C 
3 



tu 

< 

C 

y 
3 
■— 

s. 

s 








„, 


7Z 




<*^ 





B 


JS 


L. 


01 


■*- 


£ 


b" 

3 


7! 


.»-. 


sx 


E 


-a 


L. 


8) 


•*! 


c 


01 




L. 


0j 




<— 






U 


< 


IX 

c 






Z 


-3 


c 


= 


- 


0* 


< 


— 
-— 


-< 


= 







z 


u 


< 


a 


U 


E 


OS 


- 





a 
- 




s. 



— Oi s«— ^* 
'3 — 01 — 

^ < o 



ex 

a = 

ex'— "K 

i. Q.QQ "O 
< o 



,-k 0) 

ex u 

C B 

•= « 



.S "g .2 -= 
R U 3 o 

i £ 

£ 2 



<* 






RI 

u 



« > 






at ► 






;►> O) 



U 






U 






o o — ; 

sC 



tT SO 

OO — I 






o o 



o o 

ro 
m 



CM 



-H O 

rn so 



sC 









o 
in 






o 




ON 


3 


— 


O 




u 




u 




E 


T 


u 


so 
SO 


3 

t/5 



o 



oo 




so 


nj 




<L> 




O- 




D. 




cd 








o 




u 


© 


i- 


»m 


X) 


-t 


o 



o o 



o o 



o o 



o o 



o o 



o o 



<N 


m 


o> 


■<* 


O 


o 


o 


s 

c 
o 

'C 

E 


rj 


q 


— 


q 


o 


q 


,r i 




rn 


iri 


ir-i 


sd 




cs 


a^ 




«~j 


m 


<N 


in 






«m 


1— 
O 

4) 


sO 


n 


x^ 


CO 


o 




e 


-a 

o 

o 

c 

E 


q 


<r> 


sG 


q 


o 


q 


i/j 


'S: 


m 


en 


ri 


T' 




o\ 


ir. 


E» 


t 


o 


ITj 






rt 


oc 


E 

■d 

c 

0> 


-t 





ON 


, — i 


o 


i— i 


sO 




— 


1 1 








CO 





r-- 

o 



o — 



sG 

o 



90 

sO 
O 



sO 



x: 
o 

'-E 
c 



- 
= 

3 



o> fi 

a. g 

>-. o 

H -a 






?3 



J 



s 

c 



B 
S 

u 



o 



>1 



C 



cj 

u 

-a 

>. 
u 

c 

<D 
60 

r3 



B 

-a 





n. ca 




a u 




Oj (L» 








.S3 ed 




u 




T3 _ 




O i_ 




U OJ 




<u c 








CJJ _ 




c S 




• H O 








TO (/) 


u-i 


& '2 
o o 


"5 


D. 


a 


m O 


< 


3 oi 

to .a 


"5 


tft -ti 


■w 







< S 


H 


* p 



20 



NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT 

Appeals Docketed and Disposed of During the Years, 1980-81 — 1986-87 



400 



Appeals Docketed 
Appeals Disposed of 



300 



N 
U 
M 
B 
E 
R 

O 

F 

C 
A 
S 
E 
S 



200 



100 




192 




200 



1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 



21 



SOD 



hi Hi 



N 

I 

M 

B 

h 

R 

O 
F 

C 

\ 
s 
E 
S 



400 



200 



NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT 

Petitions Docketed and Allowed During the Years, 1980-81 — 1986-87 



Petitions Docketed 
Petitions Allowed 




1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 



22 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



Supreme Court Processing Time for Disposed Cases 

(Total time in days from docketing to decision) 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 



Civil domestic 

Petitions for review granted that became civil domestic appeals 

Juvenile 

Petitions for review granted that became juvenile appeals 

Other civil 

Petitions for review granted that became other civil appeals 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to death 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to life imprisonment 

Other criminal 

Petitions for review granted that became other criminal appeals 

Petitions for review granted that became postconviction remedy cases 

Administrative agency decision 

Petitions for review granted that became appeals of administrative 
agency decision 

Total appeals 



Number 


(Days) 


(Days) 


of Cases 


Median 


Mean 


2 


— 


232.0 


2 


— 


198.5 











3 


182 


184.7 


30 


217 


245.5 


29 


225 


235.6 


7 


606 


663.0 


74 


290 


315.5 


20 


200 


205.7 


18 


182 


209.8 











8 


190 


270.8 


7 


262 


278.3 


200 


250 


278.3 



23 



THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA* 



Chief Judge 
R.A. HEDRICK 



GERALD ARNOLD 
HUGH A. WELLS 
CHARLES L. BECTON 
CLIFTON E. JOHNSON 
EUGENE H. PHILLIPS 
SIDNEYS. EAGLES, JR. 



Judges 



JOHN C. MARTIN 

SARAH PARKER 

JACK COZORT 

ROBERT F. ORR 

K. EDWARD GREENE 



HUGH B. CAMPBELL 
FRANK M. PARKER 
EDWARD B. CLARK 



Retired Judges 



ROBERT M. MARTIN 

CECIL J. HILL 

E. MAURICE BRASWELL 



Clerk 
FRANCIS E. DAIL 



*Asof 30 June 1987 



24 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



The Court of Appeals 



The 12-judge Court of Appeals is North Carolina's 
intermediate appellate court; it hears a majority of the 
appeals originating from the State's trial courts. The 
Court regularly sits in Raleigh, and it may sit in other 
locations in the State as authorized by the Supreme 
Court. Sessions outside of Raleigh have not been regular 
or frequent. Judges of the Court of Appeals are elected by 
popular vote for eight-year terms. A Chief Judge for the 
Court is designated by the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court and serves in that capacity at the pleasure of the 
Chief Justice. 

Cases are heard by panels of three judges, with the 
Chief Judge responsible for assigning members of the 
Court to the four panels. Insofar as practicable, each 
judge is to be assigned to sit a substantially equal number 
of times with each other judge. The Chief Judge presides 
over the panel of which he or she is a member and desig- 
nates a presiding judge for the other panels. 

One member of the Court of Appeals, designated by the 
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, serves as chairman of 
the Judicial Standards Commission. 



In the event of a recommendation from the Judicial 
Standards Commission to censure or remove from office 
a justice of the Supreme Court, the (non-binding) recom- 
mendation would be considered by the Chief Judge and 
the six judges next senior in service on the Court of 
Appeals (excluding the judge who serves as the Commis- 
sion's chairman). Such seven-member panel would have 
sole jurisdiction to act upon the Commission's recom- 
mendation. 

Expenses of the Court, 1986-87 

Operating expenses of the Court of Appeals during the 
1986-87 fiscal year totalled $2,947,010, an increase of 
6.7% over 1985-86 expenditures of $2,763,224. Expendi- 
tures for the Court of Appeals during 1986-87 amounted 
to 2.0% of all General Fund expenditures for operation of 
the entire Judicial Department during the fiscal year. This 
percentage share of the total is the same as the Court of 
Appeals percentage share of the Judicial Department 
total in the 1985-86 fiscal year. 



Jurisdiction 

The bulk of the caseload of the Court of Appeals con- 
sists of cases appealed from the trial courts. The Court 
also hears appeals directly from the Industrial Commis- 
sion; certain final orders or decisions of the North Caro- 
lina State Bar; and the Commissioner of Insurance; the 
State Board of Contract Appeals; and appeals from cer- 
tain final orders or decisions of the Property Tax Com- 
mission. (Appeals from the decisions of other administra- 
tive agencies lie first within the jurisdiction of the superior 
courts.) 



Case Data, 1986-87 

A total of 1,288 appealed cases were filed before the 
Court of Appeals during the period July 1, 1986 - 
June 30, 1987. A total of 1,352 cases were disposed of 
during the same period. During 1986-87, a total of 458 
petitions and 1 ,480 motions were filed before the Court of 
Appeals. 

Further detail on the workload of the Court of Appeals 
is shown in the tables and graphs on the following pages. 



25 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 



Cases on Appeal 

Civil cases appealed from district courts 
Civil cases appealed from superior courts 
Civil cases appealed from administrative agencies 
Criminal cases appealed from superior courts 

Total 



Filings Dispositions 

261 
498 

77 
452 



1,288 



1,352 



Petitions 

Allowed 

Denied 

Remanded 

Total 



458 



91 

367 


458 



Motions 

Allowed 

Denied 

Remanded 

Total 



1,480 



987 

493 



1,480 



Total Cases on Appeal, Petitions and Motions 



3,226 



3,316 



26 



Totals 



INVENTORY OF CASES APPEALED TO THE COURT OF APPEALS 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 





Judicial 




Cases Filed 




Other 


Total 
Cases 


Total 


Judicial 


Appeals from 


Appeals from Superior Court 


Cases 


Division 


District 


District Courts 


Civil 


Criminal 


Appeals 


Filed 


Disposed 


1 


i 


3 


7 


1 1 





21 


26 




2 


4 


4 


8 





16 


23 




3 


6 


20 


28 





54 


57 




4 


6 


14 


24 





44 


33 




5 


6 


1 1 


19 





36 


30 




6 





3 


10 





13 


19 




7 


3 


11 


10 





24 


25 




8 


6 


12 


8 





26 


28 


II 


9 


5 


4 


9 





18 


15 




10 


18 


77 


19 


77 


191 


191 




11 


6 


14 


8 





28 


25 




12 


13 


8 


25 





46 


43 




13 


5 


9 


11 





25 


21 




14 


16 


18 


8 





42 


54 




15A/B* 


13 


23 


IS 





54 


53 




16 


3 


7 


16 





26 


32 


III 


17A/B* 


4 


6 


13 





23 


39 




18 


11 


40 


21 





72 


7S 




19A/B* 


10 


11 


17 





38 


49 




20 


II 


19 


11 





31 


47 




21 


IS 


31 


18 





67 


70 




22 


9 


15 


13 





37 


34 




23 


10 


6 


6 





22 


26 


IV 


24 


6 


7 


8 





21 


18 




25 


14 


13 


20 





47 


42 




26 


22 


38 


47 





107 


118 




27A/B* 


5 


19 


20 





44 


49 




28 


11 


23 


7 





41 


42 




29 


10 


13 


11 





34 


31 




30 


7 


15 


s 





30 


23 



261 



498 



452 



77 



1,288 



1,352 



*Combined totals for Districts 15A and 15B, Districts 17A and 17B, Districts 19A and 19B, and Districts 27A and 27B are shown. 
Separate figures for these districts were not available. 



27 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CASES BEFORE THE COURT OF APPEALS 

July 1, 1986-June 30, 1987 

Cases Disposed by Written Opinion 













Cases Affirmed 


Total Cases 






Judicial 


Judi 


cial 


Cases 


Cases 


in Part, Reversed 


by Written 


Other Cases 


Total Cases 


Division 


District 


Affirmed 


Reversed 


in Part 


Opinion 


Disposed 


Disposed 


1 


1 




17 


6 


1 


24 


2 


26 




: 




19 


2 





4X 


2 


23 




3 




40 


8 


6 


54 


3 


57 




4 




29 


4 





33 





33 




5 




32 


7 





39 


2 


41 




6 




13 


3 


1 


17 


2 


19 




7 




17 


2 


1 


20 


5 


25 




s 




22 


4 


1 


27 


1 


28 


11 


9 




10 


2 





12 


3 


15 




Mi 




103 


53 


12 


168 


23 


191 




II 




17 


5 


2 


24 


1 


25 




12 




28 


9 


4 


41 


2 


43 




13 




19 


1 





20 


1 


21 




14 




31 


9 


7 


47 


7 


54 




15A, 


B* 


32 


1 1 


4 


47 


6 


53 




16 




22 


6 


2 


30 


2 


32 


III 


17 A/ 


B* 


24 


12 


2 


38 


1 


39 




18 




51 


IX 


4 


73 


5 


78 




19A/B* 


37 


5 


2 


44 


5 


49 




20 




36 


6 


2 


44 


3 


47 




21 




43 


12 


X 


63 


7 


70 




22 




24 


6 


2 


32 


2 


34 




23 




IX 


5 


1 


24 


2 


26 


[\ 


24 




X 


8 





16 


2 


18 




25 




27 


x 





35 


7 


42 




26 




87 


13 


5 


105 


13 


118 




27A, 


B* 


2X 


14 


3 


45 


4 


49 




28 




29 


9 


4 


42 





42 




29 




17 


9 


1 


23 


2 


25 




30 




8 


10 


2 


20 


3 


23 



Totals 



888 



267 



79 



1,234 



118 



1,352 



♦Combined totals for Districts 15A and 15B, Districts 17A and 17B, Districts 19A and 19B, and Districts 27A and 27B are shown. 
Separate figures for these districts were not available. 



28 



_ 4i 



o a 

H .22 

Q 






CifNCsimtNOsr^Tf 



00 r-~ -rt IT) ro O Tf 

^- rn vD in CO iai (N 



OO ^ vO ^ O * (N 

eg in m in so m •rf 



00 

c, 

Os 



C/3 
-J 
< 

W 

a, 

On 

o 

H 

a: 

o 
u 

w 

X 
H 

w 

PEi 

o 

» 

Z 

o 



H 

w 

On 
Q 

z 

z 

o 

H 
O 



u. 
O 

© 
z 

> 

z 



r- 



© 

a» 
C 
3 
1-5 

s© 
00 

ON 



^4 

"3 



oooooooo 



oooooooo 



o o o o o o o 



o o o o o o o 



■ "2 
o ss 
H to 






"^ I/) 

■5 5 



3 § 

.Si '3 

^5 



iri-<0\OnMV10\ 



0(NfOiTiiO-H-H(N 



OOOOOOOO 



oot^i^'tmvD^ooN oo-rt— < — (N-rfin oo oo os r^ oo <n o t— 
o «— ( — (N <n ^ (N — i <n _ _« so 

ci 



(N\ON-«O l n^(N nnhH (N m O O C) tJ- 00 <N O <N »■* 



OOOOOOOO OOOOOOO ooooooo © 



(NONO^OiTiTtin 



0O 't VO - "jTfOvO 

r~ — h ci — < — 



m m CI OO d O 



<— i <N Ci (N in cj — 



OO-m^iri-Hin 

— i— < tJ- <N c> — < c> (N 



•Hf<iooin\0(NinTf 



«in(Ninooo\*0« 



c\)oci<Noomo 



oorsir^voci-^-iooo 

— O CN — Tf Tj- <N 



ci 



OciOsmci— i<N — 
— >n — (N — i — 



<Nr- — ci — r-voc-i 



csi in c> m so c> so 

<N r-~ fN CN ci CN — i 



os — h o r~ >n ■* os 



oo r-~ ■>* >n o o '^r 

rj- o so m oo in cn 



— < r-- oo cn Tt r- 

— CN CN — ' CN — 



c, 



O so ci Os m Os 

— > ci ^- in o — < 



oo ft ci tT O Os rsi 
cn in ci in so c> -^ 



oo — i ci in o cn cn 



O ci rn Os O t*» O 
cn Tt o ci in cn o 



C) 

Os 
T 



t- 

00 
Os 



oo 

Ci 

Os 



oe 

IT; 



© 

oo 

T 



— '(NciTfinsOt^OO 



# 

OQ 



O •— i CN O "sT m so 



CQ CQ 

r- oo os o — < <N c> 

— -h — (N (N (S| (N 



* 

CQ 



Tt in so r- oo os O 

(N (N (N M (N (N f-i 



t/3 

-J 
< 

H 
O 
H 



3 



u 

c 
c 



CD 



-a 
c 

ITS 
< 
CN 



Q 



03 
OS 

T> 
C 

cd 

< 



03 



^3 

a 



Q 



c 
- 



Q 

3 
o 



T3 




aj 


D 


r 






-C 


£> 


;t) 


s 



U 


"c5 
> 
Kl 



29 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 
FISCAL YEARS 1981 THROUGH 1986-87 



3000 



2500 



\ 

I 

M 

B 

E 

R 

() 
r 

C 

\ 
s 

K 

S 



2000 



1500 



1000 



500 



L 



H 



Filings 
Dispositions 



1994 




2186 



1926 1927 



1810 



1981 



1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 



Filings and dispositions in this graph include appealed cases and petitions (not motions) in the Court of Appeals. 
Dispositions exceeded filings for the past four years. 



30 





1/3 

c 













1/3 


s 


> 


w 





H 
CO 


■o 


!* 


03 


CO 


1/3 




+* 


H 

as 




P 


1/3 


o 


Q 


u 


__ 




si 


H 


*o 


Z 


■3 


w 


3 


CO 


l-S 


w 


05 




"o 




05 

u 


H 


x: 




■*-> 




k< 




o 




Z 




31 



JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT* 

(As of June 30, 1987) 



District 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 



FIRST DIVISION 

J. Herbert Small, Elizabeth City 
Thomas S. Watts. Elizabeth City 

William C. Griffin. Jr., Williamston 

David E. Reid, Jr.. Greenville 

Herbert O. Phillips, III, Morehead City 

Henry L. Stevens, III, Kenansville 
James R. Strickland, Jacksonville 

Bradford Tillery, Wilmington 
Napoleon B. Barefoot, Wilmington 

Richard B. Allsbrook, Roanoke Rapids 

Franklin R. Brown, Tarboro 
Charles B. Winberry, Rocky Mount 

James D. Llewellyn, Kinston 
Paul M. Wright, Goldsboro 

SECOND DIVISION 

Robert H. Hobgood, Louisburg 
Henry W. Hight, Jr., Henderson 

Edwin S. Preston, Jr., Raleigh 
Henry V. Barnette, Jr., Raleigh 
Robert L. Farmer, Raleigh 
Donald W. Stephens, Raleigh 



1 1 Wiley F. Bowen, Dunn 

12 Darius B. Herring, Jr., Fayetteville 
Coy E. Brewer, Jr., Fayetteville 
Edwin L. Johnson, Fayetteville 

13 Giles R. Clark, Elizabethtown 

14 Thomas H. Lee, Durham 
Anthony M. Brannon, Durham 
James M. Read, Durham 

15A Jasper B. Allen, Jr., Burlington 

15B F. Gordon Battle, Hillsboro 

16 B. Craig Ellis, Laurinburg 



THIRD DIVISION 
District 

17A Melzer A. Morgan, Jr., Wentworth 

17B James M. Long, Pilot Mountain 

18 W. Douglas Albright, Greensboro 
Edward K. Washington, High Point 
Thomas W. Ross, Greensboro 
Joseph John, Greensboro 

19A Thomas W. Seay, Jr., Spencer 
James C. Davis, Concord 

19B Russell G. Walker, Jr., Asheboro 

20 F. Fetzer Mills, Wadesboro 
William H. Helms, Wingate 

21 William Z. Wood, Winston-Salem 
Judson D. DeRamus, Jr., Winston-Salem 
William H. Freeman, Winston-Salem 

22 Robert A. Collier, Jr., Statesville 
C. Preston Cornelius, Morresville 

23 Julius A. Rousseau, Jr., North Wilkesboro 

FOURTH DIVISION 

24 Charles C. Lamm, Jr., Boone 

25 Forrest A. Ferrell, Hickory 
Claude S. Sitton, Morganton 

26 Frank W. Snepp, Jr., Charlotte 
Robert M. Burroughs, Charlotte 
Kenneth A. Griffin, Charlotte 
Chase B. Saunders, Charlotte 
W. Terry Sherrill, Charlotte 

27A Robert W. Kirby, Cherryville 
Robert E. Gaines, Gastonia 

27B John M. Gardner, Shelby 

28 Robert D. Lewis, Asheville 
C. Walter Allen, Asheville 

29 Hollis M. Owens, Jr., Rutherfordton 

30 James U. Downs, Franklin 
Janet M. Hyatt, Waynesville 



*In districts with more than one resident judge, the senior resident judge is listed first. 



32 



SPECIAL JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT 



James A. Beaty, Jr., Winston-Salem 
John B. Lewis, Jr., Farmville 
Richard D. Boner, Charlotte 
Fred J. Williams, Durham 



Donald L. Smith, Raleigh 
Marvin K. Gray, Charlotte 
Lamar Gudger, Asheville 
I. Beverly Lake, Jr., Raleigh 



EMERGENCY JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT 

Henry A. McKinnon, Jr., Lumberton 

Samuel E. Britt, Lumberton 

James H. Pou Bailey, Raleigh 



The Conference of Superior Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1987) 

Edwin S. Preston, Jr., Raleigh, President 

James M. Long, Pilot Mountain, President- Elect 

Thomas H. Lee, Durham, Vice President 

Edwin L. Johnson, Fayetteville, Secretary-Treasurer 

Charles Lamm, Boone, David Reid, Greenville 

Additional Executive Committee Members 



33 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



The Superior Courts 



North Carolina's superior courts are the general juris- 
diction trial courts for the state. In 1986-87, there were 64 
"resident"superior court judges elected to office in the 34 
judicial districts for eight-year terms by Statewide ballot. 
In addition, eight "special" superior court judges are 
appointed by the Governor for four-year terms. 

Jurisdiction 



The superior court has original jurisdiction in all felony 
cases and in those misdemeanor cases which originate by 
grand jury indictment. (Most misdemeanors are tried first 
in the district court, from which conviction may be 
appealed to the superior court for trial de novo by a jury. 
No trial by jury is available for criminal cases in district 
court.) The superior court is the proper court for the trial 
of civil cases where the amount in controversy exceeds 
S 10,000, and it has jurisdiction over appeals from admin- 
istrative agencies except the Industrial Commission, cer- 
tain rulings of the Commissioner of Insurance, the Board 
of Bar Examiners of the North Carolina State Bar, the 
Board of State Contract Appeals, and the Property Tax 
Commission. Appeals from these agencies lie directly to 
the North Carolina Court of Appeals. Regardless of the 
amount in controversy, the original civil jurisdiction of 
the superior court does not include domestic relations 
cases, which are heard in the district courts, or probate 
and estates matters and certain special proceedings heard 
first by the clerk of superior court. Rulings of the clerk are 
within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. 

Administration 

The 1 00 counties of North Carolina were grouped into 
34 judicial districts during 1986-87. Each district has at 
least one resident superior court judge who has certain 
administrative responsibilities for his home district, such 
as providing for civil case calendaring procedures. (Crimi- 
nal case calendars are prepared by the district attorneys.) 
In districts with more than one resident superior court 
judge, the judge senior in service on the superior court 
bench exercises these supervisory powers. 



The judicial districts are grouped into four divisions for 
the rotation of superior court judges, as shown on the 
map on Page 3 1 . Within the division, a resident superior 
court judge is required to rotate among the judicial dis- 
tricts, holding court for at least six months in each, then 
moving on to his next assignment. A special superior 
court judge may be assigned to hold court in any of the 
100 counties. Assignments of all superior court judges are 
made by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Under 
the Constitution of North Carolina, at least two sessions 
(a week each) of superior court are held annually in each 
of the 100 counties. The vast majority of counties have 
more than the constitutional minimum of two weeks of 
superior court annually. Many larger counties have 
superior court in session about every week in the year. 

Expenditures 

A total of $14,924,895 was expended on the operations 
of the superior courts during the 1986-87 fiscal year. This 
included the salaries and travel expenses for the 72 super- 
ior court judges, and salaries and expenses for court 
reporters and secretarial staff for superior court judges. 
The 1986-87 expenditures for the superior courts amount- 
ed to 10.1% of total General Fund expenditures for the 
operations of the entire Judicial Department during the 
1986-87 fiscal year. 

Caseload 

Including both civil and criminal cases, a total of 98, 886 
cases were filed in the superior courts during 1986-87, an 
increase of 7,550 cases (8.3%) from the total of 91,336 
cases that were filed in 1985-86. There were increases in 
filings in all case categories: civil cases, felonies, and 
misdemeanor appeals. 

Superior court case dispositions increased from 88,089 
in 1985-86 to 96,308 in 1986-87. There were disposition 
increases in all case categories. 

More detailed information on the flow of cases through 
the superior courts is included in Part IV of this Report. 



34 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES* 

(As of June 30, 1987) 



District 

1 John T. Chaffin, Elizabeth City 
Grafton G. Beaman, Elizabeth City 
John R. Parker, Manteo 

2 Hallett S. Ward, Washington 
Samuel G. Grimes, Washington 
James W. Hardison, Wiliamston 

3 E. Burt Aycock, Jr., Greenville 
J. Randal Hunter, New Bern 

Willie L. Lumpkin, III, Morehead City 

James E. Martin, Bethel 

James E. Ragan, Oriental 

H. Horton Rountree, Greenville 

4 Kenneth W. Turner, Rose Hill 
William M. Cameron, Jr., Jacksonville 
Wayne G. Kimble, Jr., Jacksonville 
James N. Martin, Clinton 

Stephen M. Williamson, Kenansville 

5 Gilbert H. Burnett, Wilmington 
Jacqueline Morris-Goodson, Wilmington 
Charles E. Rice, III, Wilmington 

Elton Glenn Tucker, Wilmington 

6 Nicholas Long, Roanoke Rapids 
Harold P. McCoy, Scotland Neck 
Robert E. Williford, Lewiston 

7 George Britt, Tarboro 
Allen W. Harrell, Wilson 
Quentin T. Sumner, Rocky Mount 
Albert S. Thomas, Jr., Wilson 

8 J. Patrick Exum, Kinston 
Kenneth R. Ellis, Fremont 
Rodney R. Goodman, Kinston 
Arnold O. Jones, Goldsboro 
Joseph E. Setzer, Jr., Goldsboro 

9 Claude W. Allen, Jr., Oxford 
Ben U. Allen, Jr., Henderson 
J. Larry Senter, Franklinton 
Charles W. Wilkinson, Oxford 

10 George F. Bason, Raleigh 
Stafford G. Bullock, Raleigh 
William A. Creech, Raleigh 
George R. Greene, Raleigh 
Joyce A. Hamilton, Raleigh 
Jerry W. Leonard, Raleigh 
Fred M. Morelock, Raleigh 
Louis W. Payne, Jr., Raleigh 
Russell G. Sherrill, III, Raleigh 



District 

1 1 Elton C. Pridgen, Smithfield 
William Christian, Sanford 
Edward H. McCormick, Lillington 
Owen H. Willis, Jr., Dunn 

12 Sol. G. Cherry, Fayetteville 
John S. Hair, Jr., Fayetteville 
Lacy S. Hair, Fayetteville 
Anna E. Keever, Fayetteville 
Warren L. Pate, Raeford 

Patricia Timmons-Goodson, Fayetteville 

13 William C. Gore, Jr., Whiteville 
Dewey J. Hooks, Jr., Whiteville 
Jerry A. Jolly, Tabor City 
David G. Wall, Elizabethtown 

14 David Q. LaBarre, Durham 
Richard Chaney, Durham 
Orlando F. Hudson, Jr., Durham 
Carolyn D. Johnson, Durham 
Kenneth C. Titus, Durham 

15A W. S. Harris, Jr., Graham 

Spencer B. Ennis, Burlington 
James K. Washburn, Burlington 

15B Stanley Peele, Chapel Hill 
Lowry M. Betts, Pittsboro 
Patricia S. Hunt, Chapel Hill 

16 John S. Gardner, Lumberton 
Adelaide G. Behan, Lumberton 
Charles G. McLean, Lumberton 
Herbert L. Richardson, Lumberton 

17A Peter M. McHugh, Reidsville 
Robert R. Blackwell, Reidsville 
Philip W. Allen, Yanceyville 

17B Jerry Cash Martin, Mount Airy 
Clarence W. Carter, King 

18 Paul T. Williams, Greensboro 
Sherry F. Alloway, Greensboro 
Robert E. Bencini, Jr., High Point 
William L. Daisy, Greensboro 
Edmund Lowe, High Point 
Lawrence C. McSwain, Greensboro 
J. Bruce Morton, Greensboro 
William A. Vaden, Greensboro 

19A Frank M. Montgomery, Salibury 
Robert M. Davis, Salisbury 
Adam C. Grant, Jr., Concord 
Clarence E. Horton, Jr., Kannapolis 



k The Chief District Court Judge for each district is listed first. 



35 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES* 



(As of June 30, 1987) 



District 

19B Richard M. Toomes. Asheboro 
William M. Neely, Asheboro 

20 Donald R. Huffman, Wadesboro 
Michael E. Beale, Southern Pines 
Ronald W. Burris, Albemarle 
Kenneth W. Honneycutt, Monroe 
Tanya T. Wallace, Carthage 

21 Abner Alexander, Winston-Salem 
Lorretta C. Biggs, Clemmons 
James A. Harrill, Jr., Winston-Salem 
Roland H. Hayes, Winston-Salem 
Robert Kason Keiger, Winston-Salem 
William B. Reingold, Winston-Salem 

22 Lester P. Martin, Jr., Mocksville 
Samuel A. Cathey, Statesville 
George T. Fuller, Lexington 
Kimberly T.Harbinson, Taylorsville 
Robert W. Johnson, Statesville 

23 Samuel L. Osborne, Wilkesboro 
Edgar B. Gregory, Wilkesboro 
Michael E. Helms, Wilkesboro 

24 Robert H. Lacey, Newland 
Charles P. Ginn, Boone 

R. Alexander Lyerly, Banner Elk 

25 L. Oliver Noble, Jr., Hickory 
Ronald E. Bogle, Hickory 
Stewart L. Cloer, Hickory 
Jonathan L. Jones, Hickory 
Timothy S. Kincaid, Newton 



District 

26 James E. Lanning, Charlotte 
Marilyn R. Bissell, Charlotte 
L. Stanley Brown, Charlotte 
Daphene L. Cantrell, Charlotte 
Richard A. Elkins, Charlotte 
Shirley L. Fulton, Charlotte 
Resa L. Harris, Charlotte 
Robert P. Johnston, Charlotte 
William G. Jones, Charlotte 
Theodore P. Matus, II, Charlotte 
William H. Scarborough, Charlotte 

27A Lawrence B. Langson, Gastonia 
Berlin H. Carpenter, Jr., Gastonia 
Harley B. Gaston, Jr., Belmont 
Timothy L. Patti, Gastonia 
Catherine C. Stevens, Gastonia 

27B George W. Hamrick, Shelby 
James T. Bowen, Lincolnton 
John K. Fonvielle, Shelby 

28 Earl J. Fowler, Jr., Arden 
Gary S. Cash, Fletcher 
Robert L. Harrell, Asheville 
Peter L. Roda, Asheville 

29 Robert T. Gash, Brevard 
Loto J. Greenlee, Marion 

Zoro J. Guice, Jr., Hendersonville 
Thomas N. Hix, Hendersonville 

30 John J. Snow, Jr., Murphy 
Steven J. Bryant, Bryson City 
Danny E. Davis, Waynesville 



"The Chief District Court Judge for each district is listed first. 



The Association of District Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1987) 

Earl J. Fowler, Arden, President 

Sol G. Cherry, Fayetteville, Vice President 

Frank M. Montgomery, Salisbury, Secretary-Treasurer 

George M. Britt, Tarboro 
Samuel A. Cathey, Statesville 
W.S. Harris, Graham 
L. Oliver Noble, Jr., Hickory 

Additional Executive Committee Members 



36 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



The District Courts 



North Carolina's district courts are trial courts with 
original jurisdiction of the overwhelming majority of the 
cases handled by the State's court system. There were 151 
district court judges serving in 34 judicial districts during 
1986-87. These judges are elected to four-year terms by 
the voters of their respective districts. 

A total of 637 magistrate positions were authorized as 
of June 30, 1987. Of this number, about 100 positions 
were specified as part-time. Magistrates are appointed by 
the senior resident superior court judge from nominations 
submitted by the clerk of superior court of their county, 
and they are supervised by the chief district court judge of 
their district. 

Jurisdiction 

The jurisdiction of the district court extends to virtually 
all misdemeanor cases, probable cause hearings in most 
felony cases, all juvenile proceedings, involuntary com- 
mitments and recommitments to mental hospitals, and 
domestic relations cases. Effective September 1, 1986, the 
General Assembly decriminalized many minor traffic 
offenses. Such offenses, previously charged as misdemea- 
nors, are now "infractions," defined as non-criminal vio- 
lations of law not punishable by imprisonment. The dis- 
trict court division has original jurisdiction for all infrac- 
tion cases. The district courts have concurrent jurisdiction 
with the superior courts in general civil cases, but the 
district courts are the proper courts for the trial of civil 
cases where the amount in controversy is $10,000 or less. 
Upon the plaintiffs request, a civil case in which the 
amount in controversy is $1,500 or less, may be desig- 
nated a "small claims" case and assigned by the chief 
district court judge to a magistrate for hearing. Magis- 
trates are empowered to try worthless check criminal 
cases when the value of the check does not exceed $500. In 
addition, they may accept written appearances, waivers of 
trial, and pleas of guilty in such worthless check cases 
when the amount of the check is $500 or less, the offender 
has made restitution, and the offender has fewer than four 
previous worthless check convictions. Magistrates may 
accept waviers of appearance and pleas of guilty in mis- 
demeanor or infraction cases involving traffic, alcohol, 
boating, hunting and fishing violation cases, for which a 
uniform schedule of fines has been adopted by the Con- 
ference of Chief District Judges. Magistrates also conduct 
initial hearings to fix conditions of release for arrested 
defendants, and they are empowered to issue arrest and 
search warrants. 

Administration 

A chief district judge is appointed for each judicial 
district by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from 
among the elected judges in the respective districts. Sub- 
ject to the Chief Justice's general supervision, each chief 
judge exercises administrative supervision and authority 
over the operation of the district courts and magistrates in 



his district. Each chief judge is responsible for: scheduling 
sessions of district court and assigningjudges; supervising 
the calendaring of noncriminal cases; assigning matters to 
magistrates; making arrangements for court reporting 
and jury trials in civil cases; and supervising the discharge 
of clerical functions in the district courts. 

The chief district court judges meet in conference at 
least once a year upon the call of the Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court. Among other matters, this annual con- 
ference adopts a uniform schedule of traffic offenses and 
fines for their violation for use by magistrates and clerks 
of court in accepting defendants' waivers of appearance 
and guilty pleas. 



The Conference of Chief District Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1987) 

George M. Britt, Tarboro, President 

Robert H. Lacey, Newland, Vice President 

Frank M. Montgomery, Salisbury, Secretary-Treasurer 



Expenditures 

Total expenditures for the operation of the district 
courts in 1986-87 amounted to $26,908,723. This is an 
increase of 11.7% over 1985-86 expenditures of 
$24,098,806. Included in this total are the personnel costs 
of court reporters and secretaries as well as the personnel 
costs of the 151 district court judges and approximately 
637 magistrates. The 1986-87 total is 18.1% of the General 
Fund expenditures for the operation of the entire Judicial 
Department, about the same percentage share of total 
Judicial Department expenditures that the district courts 
took for the 1985-86 fiscal year. 

Caseload 

During 1986-87 the statewide total number of district 
court filings (civil and criminal) increased 1 86,664 (11.1%) 
over the total number reported for 1 985-86. Not including 
juvenile proceedings and mental hospital commitment 
hearings, the filing total in 1986-87 was 1,868,965. Most 
of this increase is attributable to increases in criminal 
motor vehicle and infraction filings. Considering criminal 
motor vehicle and infraction cases together (since almost 
all infraction cases were criminal motor vehicle cases in 
prior years), there was an increase of 136,320 cases 
(16.2%) above the number of criminal motor vehicle cases 
filed in 1985-86. Filings of criminal non-motor vehicle 
cases increased by 22,292 (5.0%), and filings of civil mag- 
istrate cases increased by 21,41 1 (9.5%) above the numbers 
of cases filed in these categories in 1985-86. 

More detailed information on district court civil and 
criminal caseloads and on juvenile case activity is con- 
tained in Part IV of this Report. 



37 



DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 

(As of June 30, 1987) 



District 



3 A 
3B 

4 

5 

6 

" 

s 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15A 
15B 
16 



H. P. WILLIAMS. JR.. Elizabeth City 
MITCHELL D. NORTON, Washington 
THOMAS D. HAIGWOOD, Greenville 
WILLIAM D. McFADYEN, New Bern 
WILLIAM H. ANDREWS, Jacksonville 
JERRY L. SPIVEY, Wilmington 
DAVID H. BEARD, JR., Murfreesboro 
HOWARD S. BONEY, JR., Tarboro 
DONALD JACOBS, Goldsboro 
DAVID R. WATERS, Oxford 
C. COLON WILLOUGHBY, JR., Raleigh 
JOHN W. TWISDALE, Smithfield 
EDWARD W. GRANNIS, JR., Fayetteville 
MICHAEL F. EASLEY, Whiteville 
RONALD L. STEPHENS, Durham 
STEVE A. BALOG, Graham 
CARL R. FOX, Carrboro 
JOE FREEMAN BRITT, Lumberton 



District 

17A THURMAN B. HAMPTON, Wentworth 

17B HAROLD D. BOWMAN, Dobson 

18 HORACE M. KIMEL, JR., Greensboro 

19A JAMES E. ROBERTS, Kannapolis 

19B GARLAND N. YATES, Asheboro 

20 CARROLL LOWDER, Monroe 

21 W. WARREN SPARROW, Winston-Salem 

22 H. W. ZIMMERMAN, JR., Lexington 

23 MICHAEL A. ASHBURN, North Wilkesboro 

24 JAMES THOMAS RUSHER, Marshall 

25 ROBERT E. THOMAS, Newton 

26 PETER S. GILCHRIST, Charlotte 
27A CALVIN B. HAMRICK, Gastonia 
27B WILLIAM C. YOUNG, Shelby 

28 ROBERT W. FISHER, Asheville 

29 ALAN C. LEONARD. Rutherfordton 

30 ROY H. PATTON, JR., Waynesville 



The Conference of District Attorneys 

(Executive Committee as of June 30, 1987) 

Edv.ard W. Grannis, Presdient 

Michael F. Easley, President- Elect 

Ronald L. Stephens, Vice President 

Donald M. Jacobs, First Division Representative 

David R. Waters, Second Division Representative 

H.W. Zimmerman, Third Division Representative 

James T. Rusher, Fourth Division Representative 



The District Attorneys Association 

(Officers as of June 30, 1987) 

Edward W. Grannis, Fayetteville, President 
Michael F. Easley, Bolivia, Vice President 
Ronald L. Stephens, Durham, Vice President for 

Legislative Affairs 
Jean Elizabeth Powell, Fayetteville, Secretary- 
Treasurer 



W 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



The District Attorneys 



The State is divided into 35 prosecutorial districts 
which, with one exception, correspond to the 34 judicial 
districts. By act of the 1981 Session of the General 
Assembly, the 3rd Judicial District is divided into two 
separate prosecutorial districts. Prosecutorial Districts 
3A and 3B, effective October 1, 1981. Prosecutorial Dis- 
trict 3A consists of Pitt County, and Prosecutorial Dis- 
trict 3B is comprised of Craven, Carteret, and Pamlico 
(G.S. 7A-60). A district attorney is elected by the voters in 
each of the 35 districts for four-year terms. 

Duties 

The district attorney represents the State in all criminal 
actions brought in the superior and district courts in his 
district, and is responsible for ensuring that infraction 
cases are prosecuted efficiently. In addition to his prosec- 
utorial functions, the district attorney is responsible for 
calendaring criminal cases for trial. 

Resources 

Each district attorney may employ on a full-time basis 
the number of assistant district attorneys authorized by 
statute for his district. As of June 30, 1987, a total of 222 
assistant district attorneys were authorized for the 35 
prosecutorial districts. The district attorney of District 26 
(Mecklenburg County) had the largest staff ( 19 assistants) 
and the district attorney of eight judicial districts (15A, 
15B, 17A, 17B, 19B, 23, 24, 27B) had the smallest staff 
(three assistants). 

Each district attorney is authorized to employ an 
administrative assistant to aid in preparing cases for trial 
and to expedite the criminal court docket. The district 
attorney in 18 of the 35 districts is authorized to employ 
an investigatorial assistant who aids in the investigation 
of cases prior to trial. All district attorneys are authorized 
to employ a victim and witness coordinator. 

Expenditures 

A total of $16,980,015 was expended in 1986-87 for the 
35 offices of district attorney. In addition, a total of 
$93,520 was expended for the District Attorney's Confer- 
ence and its staff. 

1986-1987 Caseload 

A total of 83,478 criminal cases were filed in the super- 
ior courts during 1986-87, consisting of 51,210 felony 
cases and 32,268 misdemeanor appeals from the district 
courts. The total number of filings in the superior courts 
(felonies and misdemeanors) in the previous year was 
76,179. The increase of 7,299 cases in 1986-87 is a 9.6% 
increase over the 1985-86 total. 

Total criminal cases disposed of by the superior courts 
in 1986-87 amounted to 81,136. There were 48,890 felony 



dispositions; the number of misdemeanor cases disposed 
of was 32,246. Compared with 1985-86, total criminal 
case dispositions increased by 7,136 over the 74,000 cases 
disposed of in that fiscal year. 

The median ages of 1986-87 criminal cases at disposi- 
tion in the superior courts were 91 days for felony cases 
and 71 days for misdemeanor appeals. In 1985-86, the 
median age of felony cases at disposition was 86 days, and 
the median age at disposition for misdemeanor appeals 
was 67 days. 

Dispositions by jury trial in the superior courts, for 
felonies and misdemeanors, totalled 1,950 cases, or 4.0% 
of total criminal case dispositions in the superior courts. 
This was a decrease from jury dispositions of 3,306 (5.0% 
of total dispositions) during the 1985-86 year. As is evi- 
dent, a very small proportion of all criminal cases utilize 
the great proportion of superior court time and resources 
required to handle the criminal caseload. 

By contrast, in 1986-87 a majority (25,293 or 51.8%) of 
criminal case dispositions in superior courts were pro- 
cessed on submission of guilty pleas, not requiring a trial. 
This was close to the 53.5% of guilty plea dispositions 
reported for 1985-86. 

"Dismissal by district attorney" accounted for a signifi- 
cant percentage of all dispositions during 1986-87; a total 
of 14,9 19 cases, or 30.6% of all dispositions. This propor- 
tion is comparable to that recorded for prior years. Many 
of the dismissals involved the situation of two or more 
cases pending against the same defendant, resulting in a 
plea bargain agreement where the defendant pleads guilty 
to some charges in exchange for a dismissal of others. 

There was a decrease in the number of "Speedy Trial 
Act" dismissals in superior courts, from 54 in 1985-86 to 
48 in 1986-87. 

The total number of criminal cases disposed of in the 
superior courts was 2,342 cases less than the total number 
of cases filed in 1986-87. Consequently, the number of 
pending criminal cases in superior court increased from 
25,233 at the beginning of the fiscal year to a total at year's 
end of 27,575, an increase of 9.3%. 

The median age of pending felony cases in the superior 
courts increased from 83 days on June 30, 1986 to 88 days 
on June 30, 1987. Misdemeanor appeals also recorded an 
increase, with the median age of pending misdemeanor 
appeals increasing from 74 days on June 30, 1986 to 83 
days on June 30, 1987. 

Consideration of district court criminal caseloads is 
affected by the existence of a new case category in the 
district courts, "infractions." Effective September 1, 1986, 
many minor traffic offenses were decriminalized and 
thereafter charged as infractions, defined as non-criminal 
violations of law not punishable by imprisonment. 
Although non-criminal, district attorneys are responsible 
for the prosecution of these cases. 

Nearly all infraction cases were criminal motor vehicle 
cases in prior years. Therefore, for purposes of comparing 



39 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



current to prior year criminal caseloads, motor vehicle 
filings and dispositions in prior years are compared to 
filings and dispositions of motor vehicle cases plus infrac- 
tions in 1986-87. 

In the district courts, a total of 1,443,619 criminal cases 
and infractions were filed during 1986-87. This total con- 
sisted of 488.494 motor vehicle criminal cases, 486,994 
infraction cases, and 468,131 non-motor vehicle criminal 
cases. A comparison of total filings in 1986-87 with total 
filings in 1 985-86 ( 1 .285,007) reveals an increase in district 
court criminal (and infraction) filing activity of 158,612 
cases or 12.3%. Filings of non-motor vehicle cases rose by 
22.292 cases (5.0%), from a total of 445,839 cases in 
1985-86 to 468.131 cases in 1986-87. In 1985-86, 839,168 
motor vehicle cases were filed, compared to 975,488 
motor vehicle and infraction cases filed during 1986-87, 
an increase of 136,320 cases (16.2%). 

Total dispositions of motor vehicle and infraction cases 
in the district courts amounted to 925,997 cases during 
1986-87 (527,344 motor vehicle dispositions and 398,653 
infraction dispositions). As in prior years, a substantial 
portion of such cases are disposed by waiver of appear- 
ance and entry of pleas of guilty (or "responsibility" in 
infraction cases) before a clerk or magistrate. During 
1986-87, 497,631 (53.7%) of motor vehicle and infraction 
cases were disposed by waiver. This substantial number of 
cases did not, of course, require action by the district 
attorneys' offices and should not be regarded as having 
been a part of the district attorneys'caseload. The remain- 
ing 428,366 infraction and motor vehicle cases (327,930 
infraction and 1 00,436 motor vehicle cases) were disposed 
bv means other than waiver. This balance was 69,427 



cases (or 19.3%) more than the 358,939 non-waiver motor 
vehicle dispositions in 1985-86. (The clerks of court do 
not report motor vehicle criminal cases or infractions by 
case file number to the Administrative Office of the 
Courts. Only summary total number of filings and dispo- 
sitions are reported. Therefore, it is not possible by 
computer-processing to obtain pending case data for the 
motor vehicle criminal case or infraction case categories.) 

With respect to non-motor vehicle criminal case dispo- 
sitions, a total of 456,699 such cases were disposed of in 
district courts in 1986-87. As with superior court criminal 
cases, the most frequent method of disposition was by 
entry of guilty plea; the next most frequent was dismissal 
by the district attorney. Some 160,024 cases, or 35.0% of 
the dispositions were by guilty pleas. An additional 
124,879 cases, or 27.3% of the total were disposed of by 
prosecutor dismissal. The remaining cases were disposed 
of by waiver (1 1.9%), trial (9.4%), as a felony probable 
cause matter (9.3%), or by other means (7.1%). 

During 1986-87, the median age at disposition of non- 
motor vehicle criminal cases was 29 days, compared with 
28 days at disposition for 1985-86. 

Total non-motor vehicle criminal dispositions were 
11,432 cases less than the total of such filings during 
1986-87. The number of non-motor vehicle criminal cases 
pending at year's end was 86,860, compared with a total of 
75,428 at the beginning of the year, an increase of 1 1,432 
( 15.2%) in the number of pending cases. The median age 
for pending non-motor vehicle cases rose from 50 days on 
June 30, 1986 to 54 days on June 30, 1987. 

Additional information on the criminal caseloads in 
superior and district courts is included in Part IV of this 
Report. 



40 



CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 
(As of June 30, 1987) 



COUNTY 


CLERK OF COURT 


COUNTY 


Alamance 


Louise B. Wilson 


Johnston 


Alexander 


Seth Chapman 


Jones 


Alleghany 


Rebecca J. Gambill 


Lee 


Anson 


R. Frank Hightower 


Lenoir 


Ashe 


Jerry L. Roten 


Lincoln 


Avery 


Robert F. Taylor 


Macon 


Beaufort 


Thomas S. Payne, III 


Madison 


Bertie 


John Tyler 


Martin 


Bladen 


Hilda H. Coleman 


McDowell 


Brunswick 


K. Gregory Bellamy 


Mecklenburg 


Buncombe 


J. Ray Elingburg 


Mitchell 


Burke 


Major A. Joines 


Montgomery 


Cabarrus 


Estus B. White 


Moore 


Caldwell 


Jeanette Turner 


Nash 


Camden 


Catherine W. McCoy 


New Hanover 


Carteret 


Darlene Leonard 


Northampton 


Caswell 


Janet H. Cobb 


Onslow 


Catawba 


Phyllis B. Hicks 


Orange 


Chatham 


Janice Oldham 


Pamlico 


Cherokee 


Rose Mary Crooke 


Pasquotank 


Chowan 


Marjorie H. Hollowell 


Pender 


Clay 


James H. McClure 


Perquimans 


Cleveland 


Ruth S. Dedmon 


Person 


Columbus 


Lacy R. Thompson 


Pitt 


Craven 


Dorothy Pate 


Polk 


Cumberland 


George T. Griffin 


Randolph 


Currituck 


Sheila R. Doxey 


Richmond 


Dare 


Betty Mann 


Robeson 


Davidson 


Martha S. Nicholson 


Rockingham 


Davie 


Delores C. Jordan 


Rowan 


Duplin 


John A. Johnson 


Rutherford 


Durham 


James Leo Carr 


Sampson 


Edgecombe 


Curtis Weaver 


Scotland 


Forsyth 


Frances P. Storey 


Stanly 


Franklin 


Ralph S. Knott 


Stokes 


Gaston 


Betty B. Jenkins 


Surry 


Gates 


Terry L. Riddick 


Swain 


Graham 


O.W. Hooper, Jr. 


Transylvania 


Granville 


Mary Ruth C. Nelms 


Tyrrell 


Greene 


Joyce L. Harrell 


Union 


Guilford 


Barbara G. Washington 


Vance 


Halifax 


Ellen C. Neathery 


Wake 


Harnett 


Georgia Lee Brown 


Warren 


Haywood 


William G. Henry 


Washington 


Henderson 


Thomas H. Thompson 


Watauga 


Hertford 


Richard T. Vann 


Wayne 


Hoke 


Juanita Edmund 


Wilkes 


Hyde 


Lenora R. Bright 


Wilson 


Iredell 


Angelia T. Roberts 


Yadkin 


Jackson 


Frank Watson, Jr. 


Yancey 



CLERK OF COURT 

Will R. Crocker 
Ronald H. Metts 
Lucille H. York 
Claude C. Davis 
Pamela C. Huskey 
Lois S. Morris 
James W. Cody 
Phyllis G. Pearson 
Ruth B. Williams 
Robert M. Blackburn 
Linda D. Woody 
Charles M. Johnson 
Rachel H. Comer 
Rachel M. Joyner 
Louise D. Rehder 
R. Jennings White, Jr. 
Everitte Barbee 
Shirley L. James 
Mary Jo Potter 
Frances W. Thompson 
Frances D. Basden 
W.J. Ward 

W. Thomas Humphries 
Sandra Gaskins 
Judy P. Arledge 
Lynda B. Skeen 
Catherine S. Wilson 
Dixie I. Barrington 
Frankie C. Williams 
Francis Glover 
Keith H. Melton 
Charlie T. McCullen 
C. Whitfield Gibson, Jr. 
David R. Fisher 
Pauline Kirkman 
David J. Beal 
Sara Robinson 
Marian M. McMahon 
Nathan T. Everett 
Nola H. McCollum 
Lucy Longmire 
John M. Kennedy 
Richard E. Hunter, Jr. 
Timothy L. Spear 
John T. Bingham 
David B. Brantly 
Wayne Roope 
Nora H. Hargrove 
Harold J. Long 
F. Warren Hughes 



41 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



The Clerks of Superior Court 



A Clerk of Superior Court is elected for a four-year 
term by the voters in each of North Carolina's 100 coun- 
ties. The Clerk has jurisdiction to hear and decide special 
proceedings and is. ex officio, judge of probate, in addi- 
tion to performing record-keeping and administrative 
functions for both the superior and district courts of his 
county. 

Jurisdiction 

The original jurisdiction of the clerk of superior court 
includes the probate of wills and administration of dece- 
dents' estates. It also includes such "special proceedings" 
as adoptions, condemnations of private property under 
the public's right of eminent domain, proceedings to 
establish boundaries, foreclosures, and certain proceed- 
ings to administer the estates of minors and incompetent 
adults. The right of appeal from the clerks' judgments in 
such cases lies to the superior court. 

The clerk of superior court is also empowered to issue 
search warrants and arrest warrants, subpoenas, and 
other process necessary to execute the judgments entered 
in the superior and district courts of his county. For 
certain misdemeanor criminal offenses, the clerk is autho- 
rized to accept defendants' waiver of appearance and plea 
of guilty and to impose a fine in accordance with a sche- 
dule established by the Conference of Chief District 
Court Judges. 



Total expenditures for clerks' offices in 1986-87 
amounted to 31.1% of the General Fund expenditures for 
the operations of the entire Judicial Department. 

1986-87 Caseload 

During 1986-87, estate case filings totalled 43,285. This 
was an increase over the 41,593 cases filed in 1985-86. 
Estate case dispositions totalled 42,070 cases in 1986-87, 
or 5.8% more than the previous year's total of 39,765. 

A total of 39,286 special proceedings was filed before 
the 100 clerks of superior court in 1986-87. This is an 
increase of 4,005 cases ( 1 1 .4%) from the 35,28 1 filings in 
the previous fiscal year. Special proceedings dispositions 
totalled 32,309 cases, or 1.8% more than the previous 
year's total of 31,735. 

The clerks of superior court are also responsible for 
handling the records of all case filings and dispositions in 
the superior and district courts. The total number of 
superior court case filings during the 1986-87 year was 
98,886 and the total number of district court filings, not 
including juvenile proceedings and mental hospital com- 
mitment hearings, was 1,682,321. 

More detailed information on the estates and special 
proceedings caseloads is included in Part IV of this 
Report. 



Administration 

The clerk of superior court performs administrative 
duties for both the superior and district courts of his 
county. Among these duties are the maintenance of court 
records and indexes, the control and accounting of funds, 
and the furnishing of information to the Administrative 
Office of the Courts. 

In most counties, the clerk continues to perform certain 
functions related to preparation of civil case calendars, 
and in many counties, the clerk's staff assists the district 
attorney in preparing criminal case calendars as well. 
Policy and oversight responsibility for civil case calendar- 
ing is vested in the State's senior resident superior court 
judges and chief district court judges. However, day-to- 
day civil calendar preparation is the clerk's responsibility 
in all districts except those served by trial court ad- 
ministrators. 

Expenditures 

A total of S46.066.578 was expended in 1986-87 for the 
operation of the 100 clerk of superior court offices. In 
addition to the salaries and other expenses of the clerks 
and their staffs, this total includes expenditures for jurors' 
fees, and witness expenses. 



Association of Clerks of Superior Court 

(Officers as of June 30, 1987) 

John Johnson, Duplin County, 
President 

Frances W. Thompson, Pasquotank County 
First Vice President 

James L. Carr, Durham County 
Second Vice President 

Judy Arledge, Polk County 
Secretary 

Ray Elingburg, Buncombe County 
Treasurer 



42 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



Juvenile Services Division 



The Juvenile Services Division of the Administrative 
Office of the Courts provides intake, probation and after- 
care services to juveniles who are before the District 
Courts for delinquent matters, i.e., violations of the crimi- 
nal code, including motor vehicle violations; and for 
undisciplined matters, such as running away from home, 
being truant, and being beyond the parents' disciplinary 
control. 

Intake is the screening of complaints alleging delin- 
quent or undisciplined behavior by children, to determine 
whether petitions should be filed. During the 1986-87 year 
a total of 27,725 complaints were brought to the attention 
of intake counselors. Of this number, 17,956(64.8%) were 
approved for filing, and 9,769 (35.2%) were not approved 
for filing. 

Probation and aftercare refer to supervision of children 
in their own communities. Probation is authorized by 
judicial order. Aftercare service is provided for juveniles 
after their release from a training school. (Protective 
supervision is also a form of court-ordered supervision 
within the community; and this service is combined with 
probation and aftercare.) 

In 1986-87 a total of 16,5 12 juveniles were supervised in 
the probation and aftercare program. 



Expenditures 

The Juvenile Services Division is State-funded. The 
expenditures for fiscal year 1986-87 totalled $10,513,864. 
This was an increase of 8.3% over the 1985-86 expendi- 
tures. The 1986-87 expenditures amounted to 7.2% of all 
General Fund expenditures for the operation of the entire 
Judicial Department, close to the same percentage share 
of total Judicial Department expenditures for the Di- 
vision as in the previous fiscal year. 

Administration 

The Administrator of the Juvenile Services Division is 
appointed by the Director of the Administrative Office of 
the Courts. A chief court counselor is appointed for each 
judicial district by the Administrator of the Juvenile Ser- 
vices Division, with the approval of the Chief District 
Court Judge and the Administrative Officer of the 
Courts. Subject to the Administrator's general supervi- 
sion, each chief court counselor exercises administrative 
supervision over the operation of the court counseling 
services in the respective districts. 



Juvenile Services Division Staff 
(As of June 30, 1987) 

Thomas A. Danek, Administrator 

Nancy C. Patteson, Assistant Administrator 

Edward F. Taylor, Assistant Administrator 

John T. Wilson, Assistant Administrator 

Rex B. Yates, Assistant Administrator 

Jennie E. Cannon, Education Coordinator 



43 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 



Judicial 

District Chief Court Counselors 

1 Robert Hendrix 

2 Joseph Paul 

3 Eve C. Rogers 

4 Ida Ray Miles 

5 Phyllis Roebuck 

6 John R. Brady 
Pam Honeycutt 

8 Lynn C. Sasser 

9 Tommy Lewis 

10 Larry C. Dix 

1 1 Henry C. Cox 

12 PhilT. Utley 

13 Jimmy Godwin 

14 Fred Elkins 
15A Harry Derr 

15B Harold Rogerson 



Juvenile Services Division 




(As of June 30, 1987) 




Judicial 




District 


Chief Court Counselors 


16 


Robert Hughes 


17A and 17B 


Martha Lauten 


18 


J. Manley Dodson 


19A and 19B 


James Queen 


20 


Jimmy Craig 


21 


James J. Weakland 


22 


Carl T. Duncan 


23 


Wayne C. Dixon 


24 


Lynn Hughes 


25 


Lee Cox 


26 


James Yancey 


27A 


Charles Reeves 


27B 


Gloria Newman 


28 


Louis Parrish 


29 


Kenneth Lanning 


30 


Betty G. Alley 



THE COURT COUNSELORS ASSOCIATION 

(Officers for 1986-87) 

Executive Committee Members 

Harold Rogerson, President 

Carey Collins, President- Elect 

Pat Wolfe, Seretary 

Larry Dix, Treasurer 

Rick McCollister, Parliamentarian 



1984-87 

Carl Duncan 
Eve Rogers 



Board Members 
1985-88 1986-89 



Jane Clare 
Nancy Patteson 
Bruce Stanback 



Richard Alligood 
Marion Brewer 
Ann Loy 



44 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 
Public Defenders 



During 1986-87, there were seven public defender offi- 
ces in North Carolina, serving Judicial Districts 3,* 12, 
15B, 18, 26, 27A, and 28. The public defender for each 
district is appointed by the senior resident superior court 
judge of that district from a list of not less than two and 
not more than three names nominated by written ballot of 
the attorneys resident in the district who are licensed to 
practice law in North Carolina. Their terms are four 
years. Each public defender is by statute provided a min- 
imum of one full-time assistant public defender and addi- 
tional full-time or part-time assistants as may be autho- 
rized by the Administrative Office of the Courts. 



1986-87 Caseload 

The seven public defender offices disposed of cases 
involving a total of 23,287 defendents during 1986-87. 
This was an increase of 2,317 defendants, or 1 1.0%, over 
the 20,970 defendants represented during 1985-86. 

Additional information concerning the operation of 
these offices is found in Part III of this Annual Report. 



PUBLIC DEFENDERS 

(As of June 30, 1987) 



Entitlement of Indigents to Counsel 

A person is determined to be indigent if he is found 
"financially unable to secure legal representation." He is 
entitled to State-paid legal representation in: any pro- 
ceeding which may result in (or which seeks relief from) 
confinement; a fine of $500 or more; or extradition to 
another State; a proceeding alleging mental illness or 
incapacity which may result in hospitalization, steriliza- 
tion, or the loss of certain property rights; and juvenile 
proceedings which may result in confinement, transfer to 
superior court for a felony trial, or termination of paren- 
tal rights. 

Most of the cases of State-paid representation of indi- 
gents in the districts with public defenders are handled by 
the public defender's office. However, the court may in 
certain circumstances — such as existence of a potential 
conflict of interest — assign private counsel to represent an 
indigent defendant. In the other 28 districts, the assigned 
private counsel system was the only one used. 

Expenditures 

A total of $3,620,21 1 was expended for the operation of 
the seven public defenders' offices during 1986-87. This 
was an increase of $337,242 (10.3%) over the 1 985-86 total 
of $3,282,969. 



*The public defender serves only two counties of the four in Dis- 
trict 3: Pitt and Carteret. 



District 3 

Robert L. Shoffner, Greenville 

District 12 

Mary Ann Tally, Fayetteville 

District 15B 

John Kirk Osborn, Chapel Hill 

District 18 

Wallace G. Harrelson, Greensboro 

District 26 

Isabel S. Day, Charlotte 

District 27A 

Rowell C. Cloninger, Jr., Gastonia 

District 28 
J. Robert Hufstader, Asheville 



The Association of Public Defenders 


(Officers as of June 30, 1987) 


Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., President 


Marc D. Towler, Vice President 



45 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 

The Office of the Appellate Defender 

(Staff as of June 30, 1987) 



Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., Appellate Defender 
Assistant Appellate Defenders 



Louis D. Bilionis 
David W. Dorey 
Geoffrey C. Mangum 



Gayle L. Moses 
Daniel R. Pollitt 
Leland Q. Towns 



The Appellate Defender Office began operation as a 
State-funded program on October 1, 1981. (Prior to that 
date, appellate defender services were funded by a one- 
year federal grant.) The 1985 General Assembly made 
permanent The Appellate Defender Office by repealing 
its expiration provision. In accord with the assignments 
made by trial court judges, it is the responsibility of the 
Appellate Defender and his staff to provide criminal 
defense appellate services to indigent persons who are 
appealing their convictions to the N. C. Supreme Court, 
the N. C. Court of Appeals, or to Federal courts. 

The Appellate Defender is appointed by, and carries 
out his duties under the general supervision of the Chief 
Justice. The Chief Justice may, consistent with the 
resources available to the Appellate Defender and to 
insure quality criminal defense services, authorize certain 
appeals to be assigned to a local public defender office or 
to private assigned counsel instead of to the Appellate 
Defender. 



1986-87 Caseload 

As of July 1, 1986, the Appellate Defender had 92 cases 
pending in the North Carolina Supreme Court. During 
the 1986-87 year, a total of 53 additional appeals to the 
Supreme Court were assigned to the Appellate Defender's 
Office, and during that year a total of 63 cases in the 
Supreme Court were disposed of. This left 82 cases pend- 
ing as of June 30, 1987. During the 1986-87 year, the 
Appellate Defender and his staff filed a total of 47 briefs 
and 48 petitions in the Supreme Court. 

As of July 1, 1986, the Appellate Defender had 115 
cases pending in the North Carolina Court of Appeals. 
During the 1986-87 year, a total of 1 12 additional appeals 
to the Court of Appeals were assigned to the Appellate 
Defender's Office, and during that year, a total of 114 
cases in the Court of Appeals were disposed of. This left 
1 13 cases pending as of June 30, 1987. During the 1986-87 
year, the Appellate Defender and his staff filed a total of 
120 briefs and 17 petitions in the Court of Appeals. 



46 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 
The North Carolina Courts Commission 

(Members as of June 30, 1987) 



Appointed by the Governor 

Jonathan L. Rhyne, Jr., Lincolnton, Chairman 
Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

H. Parks Helms, Charlotte 

Garland N. Yates, Asheboro 
District Attorney 

Warren Owen, Charlotte 

Harold J. Long, Yadkinville 
Clerk of Court 

Dennis J. Winner, Asheville 
Member, N. C. State Senate 

Appointed by President of the Senate 
(Lieutenant Governor) 

Anthony E. Rand, Fayetteville 
Member, N.C. Senate 

Fielding Clark, II, Hickory 

Henson P. Barnes, Goldsboro 
Member, N.C. Senate 

Earl F. Parker, Apex 
Magistrate 

R.C. Soles, Jr., Tabor City 
Member, N. C. Senate 

Howard F. Twiggs, Raleigh 

Ex-Officio (Non-Voting) 

O. William Faison, Raleigh 

N.C. Bar Association Representative 

A.B. Coleman, Jr., Raleigh 
N.C. State Bar Representative 

Franklin E. Freeman, Jr., Raleigh 
Administrative Officer of the Courts 



Appointed by the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives 

Daniel T. Blue, Jr., Albemarle 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Robert C. Hunter, Marion 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Ralph S. Knott, Louisburg 
Clerk of Court 

Donald M. Dawkins, Rockingham 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Marvin D. Musselwhite, Jr., Raleigh 

Dennis A. Wicker, Sanford 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Appointed by the Chief Justice of the 
N.C. Supreme Court 

Burley B. Mitchell, Jr., Raleigh 

Associate Justice, N.C. Supreme Court 

Clifton E. Johnson, Charlotte 
Judge, N.C. Court of Appeals 

Giles B. Clark, Elizabethtown 
Superior Court Judge 

Forrest A. Ferrell, Hickory 
Superior Court Judge 

Nicholas Long, Roanoke Rapids 
District Court Judge 

Samuel McD. Tate, Morganton 
District Court Judge 



The North Carolina Courts Commission was reestab- 
lished by the 1979 General Assembly "to make continuing 
studies of the structure, organization, jurisdiction, proce- 
dures and personnel of the Judicial Department and of 
the General Court of Justice and to make recommenda- 
tions to the General Assembly for such changes therein as 
will facilitate the administration of justice". Initially, the 
Commission was comprised of 15 voting members, with 
five each appointed by the Governor, the President of the 
Senate (Lieutenant Governor), and the Speaker of the 
House. The Commission also had three ex officio mem- 
bers as shown above. 



The 1981 General Assembly amended the statutes per- 
taining to the Courts Commission, to increase the number 
of voting members from 15 to 23, with the Governor to 
appoint seven voting members, the President of the 
Senate to appoint eight voting members, and the Speaker 
of the House to appoint eight voting members. The non- 
voting ex officio members remained the same: a represen- 
tative of the North Carolina Bar Association, a represen- 
tative of the North Carolina State Bar, and the Adminis- 
trative Officer of the Courts. 



47 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 
The North Carolina Courts Commission 



The 1983 Session of the General Assembly further 
amended G.S. 7A-506, to revise the voting membership of 
the Commission. Effective July 1. 1983, the Commission 
is to consist of 24 voting members, six to be appointed by 
the Governor: six to be appointed by the Speaker of the 
House: six to be appointed by the President of the Senate; 
and six to be appointed by the Chief Justice of the North 
Carolina Supreme Court. The Governor continues to 
appoint the Chairman of the Commission, from among 
its legislative members. The non-voting ex officio mem- 
bership of three persons remains the same. 

Of the six appointees of the Chief Justice, one is to be a 
Justice of the Supreme Court, one is to be a Judge of the 
Court of Appeals, two are to be judges of superior court, 
and two are to be judges of district court. 

Of the six appointees of the Governor, one is to be a 
district attorney, one a practicing attorney, one a clerk of 
superior court, and three are to be members or former 
members of the General Assembly and at least one of 
these shall not be an attorney. 

Of the six appointees of the Speaker of the House, at 
least three are to be practicing attorneys, and three are to 
be members or formers members of the General Assem- 
bly, and at least one of these three is not to be an attorney. 

Of the six appointees of the President of the Senate, at 
least three are to be practicing attorneys, three are to be 
members or former members of the General Assembly, 
and at least one is to be a magistrate. 

During the 1986-87 year the Courts Commission had a 
total of eight meetings, all of which were held in Raleigh. 

The following Commission proposals were approved 
by the 1987 Session of the General Assembly: 

• Statutory amendment effective October 1, 1987, 



increasing the jurisdiction of magistrates and clerks 
in worthless check cases to those cases involving 
checks up to $1,000 (Chapter 355, 1987 Session 
Laws). 
• Statutory amendment effective July 24, 1987, pro- 
viding that life sentences rendered in capital cases are 
still heard initially by the Supreme Court, but other 
life imprisonment cases will now be heard on appeal 
first by the Court of Appeals (Chapter 679, 1987 
Session laws). 
In addition, the Courts Commission recommended 
that a special study commission be created to investigate 
how other states select their judges to see if any improve- 
ment can be borrowed from them and to determine the 
views of the citizens of North Carolina about how their 
judges should be selected. (Chapter 873 established the 
Judicial Selection Study Commission to "study the 
method of selecting judges in North Carolina and recom- 
mend any changes needed to improve the system.") 

The Commission also recommended that an agency 
such as the Administrative Office of the Courts or the 
Institute of Government prepare a grand jury handbook 
to provide grand jury members and foremen with guide- 
lines and legal instruction for performing this important 
civic duty. 

Finally, the Commission expressed in the form of a 
motion that "the Commission expresses its concern to the 
General Assembly about the level of compensation for 
District Court Judges in view of the duties assigned to 
them and their increased work loads." (The 1987 General 
Assembly appropriated funds for a 10% pay raise for 
district court judges.) 



48 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1986-87 
The Judicial Standards Commission 



(Members as of June 30, 1987) 



Appointed by the Chief Justice 



Court of Appeals Judge Gerald Arnold, 
Fuquay-Varina, Chairman 

Superior Court Judge James M. Long, 
Pilot Mountain 

District Court Judge W. S. Harris, Jr., Graham 



Elected by the Council of the N.C. State Bar 

E. K. Powe, Durham, Vice Chairman 
Rivers D. Johnson, Jr., Warsaw 



Appointed by the Governor 

Veatrice C. Davis, Fayetteville, Secretary 
Pamela S. Gaither, Charlotte 



Deborah R. Carrington, Executive Secretary 



THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION 
July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



The Judicial Standards Commission was established 
by the General Assembly pursuant to a constitutional 
amendment approved by the voters at the general election 
in November 1972. 

Upon recommendation of the Commission, the Su- 
preme Court may censure or remove any judge for willful 
misconduct in office, willful and persistent failure to per- 
form his duties, habitual intemperance, conviction of a 
crime involving moral turpitude, or conduct prejudicial 
to the administration of justice that brings the judicial 
office into disrepute. In addition, upon recommendation 
of the Commission, the Supreme Court may remove any 
judge for mental or physical incapacity interfering with 
the performance of his duties, which is, or is likely to 
become, permanent. 

Where a recommendation for censure or removal 
involves ajustice of the Supreme Court, the recommenda- 
tion and supporting record is filed with the Court of 
Appeals which has and proceeds under the same author- 
ity for censure or removal of a judge. Such a proceeding 
would be heard by the Chief Judge of the Court of 
Appeals and the six judges senior in service, excluding the 
Court of Appeals judge who by law serves as the Chair- 
man of the Judicial Standards Commission. 

In addition to a recommendation of censure or remov- 
al, the Commission also utilizes a disciplinary measure 
known as a reprimand. The reprimand is a mechanism 
administratively developed for dealing with inquiries 
where the conduct does not warrant censure or removal, 
but where some action is justified. Since the establishment 
of the Judicial Standards Commission in 1973, repri- 
mands have been issued in fourteen instances covering 20 
inquiries. 



During the July 1, 1986 -June 30, 1987 fiscal year, the 
Judicial Standards Commission met on November 1, 
1986, and March 21, 1987. 

A complaint or other information against a judge, 
whether filed with the Commission or initiated by the 
Commission on its own motion, is designated as an 
"Inquiry Concerning a Judge." Eighteen such inquiries 
were pending as of July 1, 1986, and 77 inquiries were filed 
during the fiscal year, giving the Commission a total 
workload of 95 inquiries. 

During the fiscal year, the Commission disposed of 65 
inquiries, and 30 inquiries remained pending at the end of 
the fiscal year. 

The determinations of the Commission regarding the 
65 inquiries disposed of during the fiscal year were as 
follows: 

(1) fifty-two inquiries were determined to involve evi- 
dentiary rulings, length of sentences, or other mat- 
ters not within the Commission's jurisdiction rather 
than questions of judicial misconduct; 

(2) two inquiries were determined to involve allega- 
tions of conduct which did not rise to such a level as 
would warrant investigation by the Commission; 

(3) ten inquiries were determined to warrant no further 
action following completion of preliminary investi- 
gations; and 

(4) one inquiry resulted in a recommendation of 
censure. 

Of the 30 inquiries pending at the end of the fiscal year: 

(1) twenty-three inquiries were awaiting initial review 
by the Commission; and 

(2) seven inquiries were awaiting completion of a pre- 
liminary investigation or were subject to other 
action by the Commission. 



49 



PART III 
COURT RESOURCES 

• Financial 

• Personnel 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Under the State Constitution the operating expenses of 
the Judicial Department (all North Carolina courts) 
"other than compensation to process servers and other 
locally paid non-judicial officers" are required to be paid 
from State funds. It is customary legislative practice for 
the General Assembly to include appropriations for the 
operating expenses of all three branches of State govern- 
ment in a single budget bill, for a two-year period ending 
on June 30 of the odd-numbered years. The budget for the 
second year of the biennium is generally modified during 
the even-year legislative session. 

Building facilities for the appellate courts are provided 
by State funds, but, by statute, the county governments 
are required to provide from county funds for adequate 
facilities for the trial courts within each of the 100 
counties. 



Appropriations from the State's General Fund for 
operating expenses for all departments and agencies of 
State government, including the Judicial Department, 
totalled $5,162,655,711 for the 1986-87 fiscal year. 
(Appropriations from the Highway Fund and appropria- 
tions from the General Fund for capital improvements 
and debt servicing are not included in this total.) 

The appropriation from the General Fund for the 
operating expenses of the Judicial Department for 1986- 
87 was $146,394,689. As illustrated in the chart below, 
this General Fund appropriation for the Judicial De- 
partment comprised 2.8% of the General Fund appropri- 
ations for the operating expenses of all State agencies and 
departments. 



TOTAL GENERAL FUND 
APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
OPERATING EXPENSES 

$5,162,655,711 




JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT 
APPROPRIATION 

$146,394,689 



2.8% 



53 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Appropriation from the State's general fund for operat- 
ing expenses oi the Judicial Department over the past 
seven fiscal years are shown in the table below and in the 
graph at the top of the following page. For comparative 
purposes, appropriations from the general fund for oper- 



ating expenses of all State agencies and departments 
(including the Judicial Department) for the last seven 
fiscal years are also shown in the table below and in the 
second graph on the following page. 



APPROPRIATIONS FROM GENERAL FUND FOR OPERATING EXPENSES 



Judicial Department 



All State Agencies 



Fiscal Year 




% Increase over 




% Increase over 




Appropriation 


previous year 


Appropriation 


previous year 


1980-1981 


82,929,174 


15.80 


3,140,949,832 


13.76 


1981-1982 


89,631,765 


8.08 


3,339,761,674 


6.33 


1982-1983 


93,927,824 


4.79 


3,488,908,246 


4.47 


1983-1984 


106,182,188 


13.05 


3,730,497,565 


6.92 


1984-1985 


121,035,791 


13.99 


4,319,568,173 


15.79 


1985-1986 


134,145,813 


10.83 


4,801,279,494 


11.15 


1986-1987 


146,394,689 


9.13 


5,162,655.711 


7.53 


AVERAGE ANNUAL 










INCREASE, 1980-1987 




10.81% 




9.42% 



During the past decade, including the seven-year 
period covered by the above table, inflation has been a 
significant factor in the national economy. 

The greatest percentage increase in Judicial Depart- 
ment appropriations during the last six years was for the 
1980-81 fiscal year. The increase for that year was due in 
large measure to a 10% pay increase for Judicial Branch 
personnel, with the same pay increase provided for per- 



sonnel of all State government agencies. A 10% pay 
increase was also provided for the 1984-85 fiscal year. 

Fiscal year 1982-83 shows the smallest percentage 
increase in Judicial Department appropriations during 
the seven-year period. The decline in percentage increase 
that year was consistent with a similar decline for all State 
government agencies. 



54 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses 

Of the Judicial Department, 1980-81 — 1986-87 



$150,000,000 

140,000,000 

130,000,000 

120,000,000 

110,000,000 

100,000,000 

90,000,000 

80,000,000 

70,000,000 

60,000,000 

50,000,000 

40,000,000 

30,000,000 

20,000,000 

10,000,000 





689 




1980-81 



1981-82 



1982-83 



1986-87 



General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses 
Of All State Agencies and Departments, 1980-81 — 1986-87 



$6,000,000,000 
5,000,000,000 
4,750,000,000 
4,500,000,000 
4,250,000,000 
4,000,000,000 
3,750,000,000 
3,500,000,000 
3,250,000,000 
3,000,000,000 
2,750,000,000 
2,500,000,000 
2,250,000,000 
2,000,000,000 
1,750,000,000 
1,500,000,000 
1,250,000,000 
1,000,000,000 
750,000,000 
500,000,000 
250,000,000 





1980-81 



1981-82 



1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



55 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 
Expenditures July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 

General Fund expenditures for operating expenses of totalled $148,328,555, divided among the major budget 

the Judicial Department during the 1986-87 fiscal year classifications as shown below. 





%of 


Amount 


Total 


2,281,161 


1.5 


2,947,010 


2.0 


14,924,895 


10.1 


26,908,723 


18.1 


46,066,578 


31.1 


10,513,864 


7.1 


18,392,136 


12.4 



Supreme Court 

Court o\ Appeals 

Superior Courts 

District Courts 

Clerks of Superior Court 

Juvenile Probation and Aftercare 

Representation for Indigents 

Assigned private counsel SI 2,258,375 

Guardian ad litem for juveniles $183,411 

Guardian ad litem — volunteer and contract program $1,117,720 

Public defenders $3,620,21 1 

Special counsel at mental hospitals $215,574 

Support services (expert witness fees, professional examinations, transcripts) $526,739 

Appellate Defender Services $470,106 
District Attorney Offices 17,073,535 11.5 

Office-District Attorney $16,980,015 

District Attorneys' Conference $93,520 
Administrative Office of the Courts 8,487,978 5.7 

General Administration $3,740,108 

Information Services $4,409,696 

Warehouse & Printing $338,174 
Judicial Standards Commission 69,625 .1 

Pilot Programs 463,491 .3 

Custody Mediation Pilot $75,849 

Indigency Screening Pilot $302,269 

Dispute Settlement Center $56,081 

\rbitration Pilot Program $29,292 
Special Projects 199,559 .1 

Model Juvenile Court Project $15,076 

Prosecution Management System $1 1,309 

Victim Assistance, 21st District $23,378 

Victim Assistance. 28th District $40,906 

Victim Assistance. 13th District $29,942 

Victim Assistance, 6th District $22,248 

N.C. Death Penalty Resources Center $50,858 

TOTAL $148,328,555* 100.0 

*General Fund expenditures exceeded General Fund appropriations by $1,933,866 which was funded from the non- 
re - , crting cash balance of the Indigent Persons' Attorney Fee account. 



56 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 
Expenditures, July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



DISTRICT COURTS 

18.1% 



ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 
OF THE COURTS 

5.7% 



SPECIAL PROJECTS 0.1% 

RESERVES 
RETIREES INCREASE 

0.9% 




CLERKS 
OF 

SUPERIOR 
COURT 
31.1% 



GUARDIAN AD LITEM 1.2% 

PILOT PROGRAMS 0.3% 



As the above chart illustrates, most (70.8%) of Judicial 
Department expenditures goes for operation of the 
State's trial courts: operation of superior courts took 
10.1% of total expenditures; operation of the district 
courts (including magistrates, judges and court reporters) 
took 18.1% of the total; the clerks' office, 31.1%, of the 



SUPERIOR COURTS 

10.1% 



DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 

11.5% 



COURT OF APPEALS 2.0% 
SUPREME COURT 1.5% 

LEGAL REPRESENTATION 

FOR INDIGENTS 11.2% 
JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION 0.1% 

JUVENILE PROBATION AND AFTERCARE 7.1% 

total; and district attorneys offices, 1 1.5%) of total Judicial 
Department expenditures. 

The total General Fund expenditures of $148,328,555 
for 1986-87 represents a 9.0% increase over expenditures 
of $136,029,696 in 1985-86. 



General Fund Expenditures For The Judicial Department 
Fiscal Year 1980-81 — 1986-87 



$150,000,000 

140,000,000 

130,000,000 

120,000,000 

110,000,000 

100,000,000 

90,000,000 

80,000,000 

70,000,000 

60,000,000 

50,000,000 

40,000,000 

30,000,000 

20,000,000 

10,000,000 





$148,328,555 




1980-81 



1981-82 



1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



57 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Department Receipts 
July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Receipts for the Judicial Department in the 1986-87 
fiscal year totalled S87.037.567. The several sources of 
these receipts are shown in the table below. As in the 
previous years, the major source of receipts is the assess- 
ment of "court costs" in superior and district courts, paid 
by litigants in accordance with the schedule of costs and 
lees set out in G.S. 7 A-304 et seq.\ these payments consti- 



tuted 65.75% of the total receipts during 1986-87. Fines 
and forfeitures made up 29. 16% of the total. Receipts in 
the remaining categories — Supreme Court and Court of 
Appeals filing fees, sales of Supreme Court and Court of 
Appeals Reports and payments on indigent representa- 
tion judgments — made up approximately five percent of 
the total. 



Source of Receipts 


Amount 


Supreme Court Fees 


$ 10,972 


Court of Appeals Fees 


33,108 


Superior and District 




Court Costs 


57,223,046 


Fines and Forfeitures 


25,385,015 


Sales of Appellate 




Division Reports 


161,517 


Payments on Indigent 




Representation 




Judgments 


1,986,105 


Ten-Day License 




Revocation Fee 


1,125,860 


Interest on Checking 




Accounts 


1,111,944 



Total 



$87,037,567 



%of 
Total 

.01 
.04 

65.75 
29.16 

.19 

2.28 

1.29 

1.28 
100.00 



This total of S87.037.567 is an increase of 10.4% over 
total 1985-86 receipts of S78,842,797. The graph below 



illustrates increases in recent years in total Judicial 
Department receipts. 



Judicial Department Receipts, 1980-81 — 1986-87 



S90.000.000 
■50.000.000 
"it ooo 000 
6fJ.000.000 
50.000.000 
40,000,000 
50,000,000 
20,000,000 
10 000.000 




-$87,037,567- 



$78,842,797. 



S5 1.9 13.089 S53.493.060 




1980-81 



981-82 




1982-83 



984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



58 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Distribution of Judicial Department Receipts 
(July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987) 



As required by the State Constitution, fines, penalties 
and forfeitures collected by the courts in criminal cases 
are distributed to the respective counties in which the 
cases are tried. These funds must be used by the counties 
for the support of the public schools. 

A uniform schedule of court costs for civil and criminal 
cases, comprised of a variety of fees, is set by statute for 
cases filed in the superior and district courts. Statutes 
prescribe the distribution of these fees and provide that 
certain fees shall be devoted to specific uses. For example, 
a facilities fee is included in court costs when costs are 
assessed, and this fee is paid over to the respective county 
or municipality which provided the facility used in the 
case. These fees must be utilized by the counties and 
municipalities to provide and maintain courtrooms and 
related judicial facilities. 

Officer fees (for arrest or service of process) are 
included, where applicable, in the cost of each case filed in 
the trial courts. If a municipal officer performed these 
services in a case, the fee is paid over to the respective 
municipality. Otherwise, all officer fees are paid to the 
respective counties in which the cases are filed. 

A jail fee is included in the costs of each case where 
applicable; and these fees are distributed to the respective 



Remitted to State Treasurer 

Supreme Court Fees 

Court of Appeals Fees 

Sales of Appellate Division Reports 

Law Enforcement Officers Benefit and 

Retirement Fund Fees 
Other Superior and District Court Fees 
Total to State Treasurer 

Distributed to Counties 

Fines and Forfeitures 

Judicial Facilities Fees 

Officer Fees 

Jail Fees 

Ten-Day License Revocation Fees 

Total to Counties 

Distributed to Counties and Beneficiaries 

Interest on Checking Accounts 

Distributed to Municipalities 

Judicial Facilities Fees 

Officer Fees 

Jail Fees 

Total to Municipalities 

Retained by Judicial Department 

Payments on Indigent Representation 

Judgments 
GRAND TOTAL 



county or municipality whose facilities were used. Most 
jail facilities in the State are provided by the counties. 

A fee for the Law Enforcement Officers Benefit and 
Retirement Fund is included as a part of court costs when 
costs are assessed in a criminal case. As required by 
statute, the Judicial Department remits these fees to the 
State Treasurer, for deposit in the Law Enforcement 
Officers Benefit and Retirement Fund. 

Except as indicated, all superior and district court costs 
collected by the Judicial Department are paid into the 
State's General Fund, as are appellate court fees and 
proceeds from the sales of appellate division reports. 

When private counsel or a public defender is assigned 
to represent an indigent defendant in a criminal case, the 
trial judge sets the money value for the services rendered. 
If the defendant is convicted, a judgment lien is entered 
against him for such amount. Collections on these judg- 
ments are paid into and retained by the department to 
defray the costs of legal representation of indigents. 

Proceeds from the ten-day driver license revocation fee, 
which driving-while-intoxicated offenders must pay to 
recover their driver licenses, are distributed to the coun- 
ties. 





%of 


Amount 


Total 


10,972 


.01 


33,108 


.04 


161,517 


.19 


5,724,856 


6.58 


38,246,373 


43.94 


44,176,826 


50.76 


25,385,015 


29.16 


7,119,492 


8.18 


3,193,577 


3.67 


710,040 


.82 


1,125,860 


1.29 


37,533,984 


43.12 



1,111,944 



1.28 



357,505 


.41 


1,866,561 


2.14 


4,642 


.01 


2,228,708 


2.56 



1,986,105 
87,037,567 



2.28 
100.00 



59 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Amounts of Fees, Fines and Forfeitures Collected by the Courts and 

Distributed to Counties and Municipalities* 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Distributed to Counties 



Distributed to Municipalities 





Facility 


Officer 


Jail 


Fines and 


Facility 


Officer 


Jail 




Count\ 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Forfeitures 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Total 


Alamance 


198.434 


47,588 


25,338 


449,702 


-0- 


27,273 


-0- 


658,336 


Alexander 


19,914 


10.493 


6,283 


85,013 


-0- 


584 


-0- 


122,287 


Alleghany 


8,149 


4,903 


1,670 


37,821 


-0- 


396 


-0- 


52,939 


Anson 


32,222 


19.014 


510 


138,025 


-0- 


1,453 


-0- 


191,224 


Ashe 


16,161 


12,356 


1,045 


60,908 


-0- 


368 


-0- 


90,838 


Avery 


12,898 


9,078 


750 


51,565 


-0- 


592 


-0- 


74,883 


Beaufort 


62,040 


45.725 


17,747 


282,650 


-0- 


9,552 


-0- 


417,715 


Bertie 


27,701 


22,786 


1.802 


86.257 


-0- 


982 


-0- 


139,528 


Bladen 


47.366 


36,160 


921 


129,238 


1,230 


1,707 


-0- 


216,621 


Brunswick 


48,560 


27,899 


4,261 


237,252 


1,825 


2,256 


-0- 


322,053 


Buncombe 


183,899 


106,333 


4,090 


720,916 


-0- 


43,193 


-0- 


1,058,432 


Burke 


83,354 


34,046 


10,438 


294,003 


-0- 


11,509 


-0- 


433,350 


Cabarrus 


86,347 


48,638 


15,233 


325,476 


11,779 


36,048 


-0- 


523,520 


Caldwell 


66,496 


28,360 


1,693 


225,112 


-0- 


9,539 


-0- 


331,200 


Camden 


6.909 


5,398 


780 


28,291 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


41,378 


Carteret 


69,584 


33,246 


2,054 


223,638 


-0- 


18,483 


-0- 


347,004 


Caswell 


18,601 


16,040 


1,283 


101,032 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


136,955 


Catawba 


67,224 


45,356 


9,573 


431,644 


62,526 


30,148 


-0- 


646,471 


Chatham 


38,365 


37,371 


4,923 


190,740 


11,729 


1,790 


270 


285,188 


Cherokee 


24,988 


21,841 


4,208 


113,276 


-0- 


1,962 


245 


166,520 


Chowan 


16,311 


11,270 


963 


46,069 


-0- 


3,152 


-0- 


77,765 


Clay 


5,215 


3,929 


407 


29,649 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


39,200 


Cleveland 


87,414 


39,979 


21,796 


33 1 ,449 


-0- 


10,328 


-0- 


490,966 


Columbus 


50,983 


46,315 


3,492 


163,046 


2,230 


2,841 


75 


268,982 


Craven 


99,914 


41,041 


14,634 


349,908 


-0- 


21,501 


-0- 


526,997 


Cumberland 


298,424 


102,664 


32,186 


756,438 


-0- 


68,682 


-0- 


1,258,394 


Currituck 


20,583 


16,636 


3,133 


97,681 


-0- 


4 


-0- 


138,036 


Dare 


59,276 


27,948 


5,432 


275,840 


-0- 


20,380 


-0- 


388,876 


Davidson 


88,387 


68,531 


9,378 


476,794 


11,470 


8,080 


-0- 


662,640 


Davie 


25,906 


18,529 


910 


90,277 


-0- 


687 


-0- 


136,309 


Duplin 


42,244 


22,485 


9,102 


174,737 


-0- 


992 


405 


249,965 


Durham 


291,526 


93,718 


4,979 


917,053 


-0- 


103,942 


-0- 


1,411,219 


Edgecombe 


45,926 


53,964 


11,320 


145,636 


38,825 


21,289 


590 


317,549 


Forsyth 


299,118 


20,467 


34,294 


1,011,972 


2,769 


125,573 


-0- 


1,494,193 


Franklin 


32,934 


20,343 


2,314 


113,035 


-0- 


264 


-0- 


168,890 


Gaston 


152,382 


90,499 


5,225 


498,328 


-0- 


22,838 


-0- 


769,272 


Gates 


12,408 


8,972 


2,044 


54,135 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


77,559 


Graham 


5,446 


4,278 


2,664 


33,524 


-0- 


32 


-0- 


45,944 


Granville 


35,311 


17,047 


3,551 


116,655 


-0- 


4,149 


178 


176,891 


Greene 


15,652 


11,619 


1,516 


56,104 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


84,890 


Guilford 


419,609 


54,070 


8,099 


1,062,364 


-0- 


169,340 


-0- 


1,713,482 


Halifax 


66,142 


52,109 


9,064 


267,140 


4,540 


11,827 


88 


410,910 


Harnett 


50,900 


38,778 


17,860 


242,362 


10,809 


4,622 


61 


365,393 


Haywood 


45,547 


26,038 


7,702 


226,689 


502 


3,483 


15 


309,976 


Henderson 


54,145 


31,166 


14,418 


260,872 


155 


2,616 


-0- 


363,372 


Hertford 


27,297 


19,015 


2,869 


96,448 


-0- 


1,196 


-0- 


146,825 


Hoke 


25,133 


15,511 


1,572 


81,062 


-0- 


1,620 


-0- 


124,898 


Hyde 


7,357 


5,912 


1,661 


47,647 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


62,577 


Iredell 


79,588 


46,774 


8,683 


389,196 


15,254 


11,519 


617 


551,631 


Jackson 


20,775 


15,127 


8,646 


105,430 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


149,978 



60 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Amounts of Fees, Fines and Forfeitures Collected by the Courts and 

Distributed to Counties and Municipalities* 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Distributed to Counties 



Distributed to Municipalities 





Facility 


Officer 


Jail 


Fines and 


Facility 


Officer 


Jail 




County 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Forfeitures 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Total 


Johnston 


71,039 


54,451 


21,416 


338,680 


21,453 


12,991 


100 


520,130 


Jones 


8,560 


5,993 


240 


30,84 


-0- 


360 


-0- 


45,337 


Lee 


44,561 


25,736 


18,178 


184,898 


-0- 


7,844 


-0- 


281,216 


Lenoir 


65,026 


28,265 


10,083 


244,512 


-0- 


9,706 


-0- 


357,591 


Lincoln 


42,333 


27,944 


1,259 


159,545 


-0- 


2,804 


-0- 


233,885 


Macon 


22,041 


15,881 


2,190 


115,378 


-0- 


592 


-0- 


156,082 


Madison 


12,516 


9,538 


245 


41,165 


-0- 


480 


-0- 


63,944 


Martin 


30,548 


22,476 


4,520 


111,251 


-0- 


1,768 


-0- 


170,562 


McDowell 


35,292 


21,725 


2,590 


161,938 


-0- 


2,815 


-0- 


224,360 


Mecklenburg 


632,630 


66,557 


5 


1,856,834 


-0- 


395,823 


-0- 


2,951,849 


Mitchell 


9,355 


6,270 


511 


34,629 


-0- 


636 


-0- 


51,401 


Montgomery 


36,025 


27,493 


5,228 


109,775 


-0- 


1,932 


-0- 


180,453 


Moore 


58,039 


40,012 


2,608 


267,319 


4,040 


8,454 


-0- 


380,472 


Nash 


64,474 


67,610 


8,290 


290,107 


52,792 


25,199 


1,184 


509,656 


New Hanover 


174,376 


51,302 


9,656 


557,165 


-0- 


45,473 


-0- 


837,972 


Northampton 


27,982 


24,045 


3,153 


109,154 


1,225 


1,200 


-0- 


166,759 


Onslow 


146,154 


69,114 


20,209 


488,563 


-0- 


58,084 


-0- 


782,125 


Orange 


42,523 


34,660 


9,180 


244,882 


25,509 


13,746 


105 


370,604 


Pamlico 


9,530 


7,670 


687 


39,865 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


57,752 


Pasquotank 


29,828 


13,425 


6,633 


131,893 


-0- 


7,674 


-0- 


189,453 


Pender 


25,827 


18,577 


2,738 


100,194 


-0- 


556 


-0- 


147,893 


Perquimans 


12,214 


7,884 


780 


35,079 


-0- 


1,592 


-0- 


57,549 


Person 


29,074 


21,172 


3,582 


117,477 


5 


3,808 


-0- 


175,117 


Pitt 


136,520 


51,673 


18,820 


469,967 


9,074 


44,930 


400 


731,385 


Polk 


13,692 


11,032 


258 


70,102 


-0- 


456 


-0- 


95,540 


Randolph 


79,373 


62,311 


7,002 


272,022 


2,080 


11,341 


-0- 


434,129 


Richmond 


53,143 


32,815 


9,218 


248,174 


-0- 


3,351 


-0- 


346,700 


Robeson 


110,224 


84,007 


11,557 


722,349 


36,010 


29,208 


183 


993,538 


Rockingham 


70,998 


39,390 


7,138 


500,525 


20,639 


20,005 


-0- 


658,695 


Rowan 


96,473 


55,428 


28,529 


379,270 


-0- 


29,822 


-0- 


589,523 


Rutherford 


49,246 


28,328 


8,094 


207,717 


-0- 


7,885 


-0- 


301,270 


Sampson 


62,451 


43,069 


8,706 


238,143 


-0- 


4,904 


-0- 


357,272 


Scotland 


52,035 


33,147 


7,821 


209,830 


-0- 


8,424 


-0- 


311,256 


Stanly 


39,322 


12,003 


3,959 


89,253 


-0- 


9,512 


-0- 


254,049 


Stokes 


21,526 


11,568 


3,514 


82,880 


-0- 


840 


-0- 


120,328 


Surry 


61,148 


45,842 


2,646 


248,105 


1,625 


10,408 


5 


369,779 


Swain 


11,793 


9,991 


4,436 


60,057 


-0- 


216 


-0- 


86,493 


Transylvania 


21,139 


16,497 


5,838 


84,683 


-0- 


2,685 


-0- 


1 30,842 


Tyrrell 


7,838 


6,286 


937 


22,330 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


37,391 


Union 


73,853 


55,029 


9,969 


301,746 


-0- 


15,516 


-0- 


456,114 


Vance 


50,347 


20,693 


7,436 


164,119 


-0- 


5,524 


-0- 


248,119 


Wake 


651,311 


79,164 


28,419 


1,375,066 


6,000 


191,050 


92 


2,331,102 


Warren 


17,727 


14,555 


2,720 


65,608 


-0- 


140 


-0- 


100,750 


Washington 


15,813 


10,996 


4,025 


43,615 


-0- 


1,997 


-0- 


76,446 


Watauga 


30,516 


19,098 


3,090 


92,150 


-0- 


4,088 


-0- 


148,942 


Wayne 


87,316 


47,753 


6,416 


239,957 


1,410 


22,118 


29 


405,000 


Wilkes 


63,275 


34,389 


5,350 


264,464 


-0- 


2,270 


-0- 


369,749 


Wilson 


64,972 


38,292 


6,312 


182,168 


-0- 


15,964 


-0- 


307,708 


Yadkin 


25,613 


17,332 


8,254 


113,569 


-0- 


1,318 


-0- 


166,085 


Yancey 


10,817 


7,724 


1,087 


36,559 


-0- 


260 


-0- 


56,447 


State Totals 


7,119,492 


3,193,577 


710,040 


25,385,015 


357,505 


1,866,561 


4,642 


38,636,832 



♦Facility and jail fees are distributed to the respective counties and municipalities which furnished the facilities. If the officer who made 
the arrest or served the process was employed by a municipality, the officer fee is distributed to the municipality; otherwise all officer 
fees are distributed to the respective counties. By provision of the State Constitution, fines and forfeitures collected by the courts within 
a county are distributed to that county for support of the public schools. 

61 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 
July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



1 he State pro\ ides legal counsel for indigent persons in 
a variet) of actions and proceedings, as specified in the 
North Carolina General Statutes, Sections 7A-450 et seq. 
These include criminal proceedings, judicial hospitaliza- 
tion proceedings, juvenile proceedings which may result 
in commitment to an institution or transfer to superior 
court for trial as an adult. Legal representation for indi- 
gents may be by assignment of private counsel, by 
alignment of special public counsel (involving mental 
hospital commitments), or by assignment of a public 
defender. 

Seven of North Carolina's judicial districts have an 
office of public defender: Districts 3. 12, 15B, 18, 26,27A, 
and 28. The other 27 districts utilize only assignments of 
private counsel. Private counsel may also be assigned in 
the seven districts which have a public defender in the 
event of a conflict of interest involving the public defend- 
er's office and the indigent and in the event of unusual 
circumstances when, in the opinion of the court, the 
proper administration of justice requires the assignment 
of private counsel rather than the public defender in those 
cases. 

During 1986-87. the Criminal Law Clinic of the School 
of Law. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 
provided counsel services to indigents in 220 cases (no 
felonies), assigned by the courts in Orange County to the 
Clinic. These counsel services for indigents were provided 
by the Clinic at no cost to the Judicial Department. 

The Appellate Defender Office began operation as a 
State-funded program on October 1, 1981. (Prior to 
October 1 . 1981. appellate defender services were funded 
by a one-year federal grant.) Pursuant to assignments 
made by trial court judges, it is the responsibility of the 
Appellate Defender and his staff to provide criminal 
defense appellate services to indigent persons who are 
appealing their convictions to either the Supreme Court 
or the Court of Appeals. The Appellate Defender is under 
the general supervision of the Chief Justice. The Chief 
Justice may, consistent with the resources available to the 



Appellate Defender and to insure quality criminal defense 
services, authorize certain appeals to be assigned to a 
local public defender office or to private assigned counsel 
instead of to the Appellate Defender. The cost data 
reported reflects the activity of this office in both the 
Supreme Court and Court of Appeals for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1987. 

In addition, the State provides a full-time special coun- 
sel at each of the State's four mental hospitals, to repre- 
sent patients in commitment or recommitment hearings 
before a district court judge. Under North Carolina law, 
each patient committed to a mental hospital is entitled to 
a judicial hearing (before a district court judge) within 90 
days after the initial commitment, a further hearing 
within 180 days after the initial commitment, and there- 
after a hearing once each year during the continuance of 
an involuntary commitment. 

A juvenile alleged to be within the jurisdiction of the 
court has the right to be represented by counsel in all 
proceedings; and juveniles are conclusively presumed to 
be indigent and entitled to State-appointed and State- 
paid counsel (G.S. 7A-584). When a petition alleges that a 
juvenile is abused or neglected, the judge is required to 
appoint a guardian ad litem. If the guardian ad litem is 
not an attorney, the judge in addition is to appoint an 
attorney to represent the juvenile's interests (G.S. 7A- 
586). And where a juvenile petition alleges that a juvenile 
is abused, neglected or dependent, the parent has a right 
to appointed counsel in cases of indigency (G.S. 7A-587). 

The cost of all programs of indigent representation, 
rounded to the nearest dollar, was $18,392,136 in the 
1986-87 fiscal year, compared to $16,480,870 in the 1985- 
86 fiscal year, an increase of 11.6%. The total amount 
expended for these activities was 12.4% of total Judicial 
Department expenditures in the 1986-87 fiscal year. 

Following is a summary of case and cost data for 
representation of indigents for the fiscal year, July 1, 1986 
through June 30, 1987. 



62 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 
July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Assigned Private Counsel 

Capital offense cases 
Adult cases (other than capital) 
Juvenile cases 
Totals 

Guardian ad litem for juveniles 

Guardian ad litem volunteer and 
contract program 

Public Defender Offices 

*District 3 
District 12 
District 15B 
District 18 
District 26 
District 27A 
District 28 
Totals 



Number 


Total 


Average 


of Cases*** 


Cost 


Per Case 


453 


1,207,498 


2,666 


43,489 


10,321,062 


237 


6,039 


729,815 


121 


49,981 


12,258,375 


245 



1,358 



183,411 



1,117,720 



135 



1,641 


331,778 


202 


2,788 


634,862 


228 


875 


174,877 


200 


2,914 


747,092 


256 


0,816 


981,147 


91 


2,203 


409,268 


186 


2,050 


341,187 


166 



23,287 



3,620,211 



155 



**Criminal Law Clinic, UNC 

Appellate Defender Office 470,106 

Special Counsel at mental hospitals 215,574 

Transcripts, records and briefs 386,847 

Professional examinations 35,311 

Expert witness fees 104,581 

GRAND TOTAL 18,392,136 
*The Public Defender's Office serves only Pitt and Carteret Counties in Judicial District 3. 

**During 1986-87, the Criminal Law Clinic of the School of Law, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, provided counsel 
services to indigents in 220 misdemeanor cases. These counsel services for indigents were provided by the Clinic at no cost to the 
Judicial Department. 

***The number of "cases" shown is the number of defendants in cases disposed of by public defenders during the 1986-87 year. 



63 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Special Counsel at Mental Hospitals 
July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



The total cost of providing special counsel at each of 
the State's four mental hospitals, to represent patients in 
commitment or recommitment hearings, was $215,574 
for the 1986-87 fiscal year. There was a total of 10,744 
hearings held during the year, for an average cost per 
hearing of S20.06 for the special counsel service. 



The following table presents data on the hearings held 
at each of the mental hospitals in 1986-87. There were 582 
more hearings held in 1986-87 than in 1985-86, an 
increase of 5.7% in total hearings. 



Broughton Cherry 



Initial Hearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 

First Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 

Second or Subsequent Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 

Modification of Prior Order Hearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 

Total Hearings or Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Grand Totals 



709 
336 
750 

1,795 



1,261 
262 
451 

1,974 



Dorothea 
Dix 

687 
168 
449 

1,304 



John 
Umstead 

1,174 
399 

583 

2,156 



Totals 

3,831 
1,165 

2,233 

7,229 



154 


354 


213 


253 


974 


33 


27 


27 


15 


102 


37 


100 


49 


84 


270 


224 


481 


289 


352 


1,346 


276 


370 


332 


633 


1,611 


5 





7 


1 


13 


13 


2 


21 


96 


132 


294 


372 


360 


730 


1,756 


3 


233 


2 


3 


241 


14 


22 


38 


70 


144 


8 


6 


4 





18 


25 


261 


44 


73 


403 


,142 


2,218 


1,234 


2,063 


6,657 


388 


311 


240 


485 


1,424 


808 


559 


533 


763 


2,663 



2,338 



3,088 



2,007 



3,311 



10,744 



64 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Assigned Counsel 



Guardian Ad Litem 



District 1 




Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 


18 
102 

53 
131 

25 
322 

46 


2,908 
35,152 
12,701 
44,367 

5,606 
76,391 

9,030 


5 

4 

16 

7 

4 

30 

2 


585 
325 

2,038 
525 
657 

2,229 
175 


District 


Totals 


697 


186,155 


68 


6,534 


District 2 












Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 


384 
41 

184 
28 

102 


87,451 
10,264 
31,561 
11,241 
19,741 


25 
6 
4 

3 


1,300 

453 

375 



150 


District 


Totals 


739 


160,258 


38 


2,278 


District 3 












Carteret 
Craven 
Pamlico 
Pitt 




76 
684 

76 
343 


24,782 
170,139 

18,403 
106,179 


21 
2 
3 

14 


2,460 
200 
200 

1,346 


District 


Totals 


1,179 


319,503 


40 


4,206 


District 4 












Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 




296 

28 

1,014 

294 


91,650 

8,337 

320,724 

96,576 


21 


87 

2 


2,650 


8,825 
225 


District 


Totals 


1,632 


517,287 


110 


11,700 


District 5 












New Hanover 
Pender 


1,110 

79 


340,314 
26,251 


4 



470 



District 


Totals 


1,189 


366,565 


4 


470 


District 6 












Bertie 
Halifax 
Hertford 
Northamp 


ton 


166 
516 
228 
164 


41,108 

141,015 

50,895 

42,664 


5 

20 

17 

9 


624 
2,235 
2,000 
1,025 


District 


Totals 


1,074 


275,682 


51 


5,884 


District 7 












Edgecomb 

Nash 

Wilson 


2 


673 
593 

747 


179,202 
180,109 
208,201 




17 
6 




2,500 

850 


District 


Totals 


2,013 


567,512 


23 


3,350 



65 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Assigned Counsel 



Guardian Ad Litem 



Number of Cases 



District 8 



Greene 


78 


Lenoir 


715 


Wayne 


1,060 


District Totals 


1,853 


District 9 




Franklin 


303 


Granville 


477 


Person 


329 


Vance 


564 


Warren 


150 


District Totals 


1,823 


District 10 




Wake 


3,868 


District Totals 


3,868 


District 11 




Harnett 


573 


Johnston 


849 


Lee 


545 


District Totals 


1,967 


District 12 




Cumberland 


350 


Hoke 


19 


District Totals 


369 


District 13 




Bladen 


368 


Brunswick 


435 


Columbus 


580 


District Totals 


1,383 


District 14 




Durham 


2,888 


District Totals 


2,888 


District 15 A 




Alamance 


989 


District Totals 


989 


District 15B 





Chatham 
Orange 

District Totals 



85 
228 

313 



Expenditures 

24,815 
144,486 
290,748 

460,049 



64,447 
84,002 
67,467 
110,796 
31,039 

357,751 



1,142,555 
1,142,555 



94,059 

106,375 

72,286 

272,720 



190,699 
24,206 

214,905 



70,397 
111,204 
125,761 

307,362 



675,702 
675,702 



227,193 
227,193 



28,032 
53,761 

81,793 



Number of Cases 

3 

3 

J_ 

1 



9 
7 

24 
3 

_4 

47 



U 
11 



23 
24 



5 

IX 
32 

55 



22 
22 

J_ 
1 



6 
14 

20 



Expenditures 

350 
350 
450 



1,150 



1,275 
875 

3,510 
750 
508 

6,918 



5,638 
5,638 



350 


q 

350 



1,727 
50 

1,777 



2,682 
2,555 
5,442 

10,679 



5,795 
5,795 



_5P_ 
50 



1,055 
1,610 

2,665 



66 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Assigned Counsel 



Guardian Ad Litem 





Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


District 16 










Robeson 
Scotland 


1,394 

578 


333,866 
125,190 


67 
21 


5,819 
1,840 


District Totals 


1,972 


459,056 


88 


7,659 


District 17 A 










Caswell 
Rockingham 


147 
925 


29,318 
181,267 


12 
9 


975 

725 


District Totals 


1,072 


210,585 


21 


1,700 


District 17 B 










Stokes 
Surry 


200 
695 


67,743 
146,034 


1 
12 


100 

1,275 


District Totals 


895 


213,777 


13 


1,375 


District 18 










Guilford 


486 


147,310 


43 


6,611 


District Totals 


486 


147,310 


43 


6,611 


District 19 A 










Cabarrus 
Rowan 


698 
1,004 


180,282 
196,168 


29 

54 


4,225 
8,146 


District Totals 


1,702 


376,450 


83 


12,371 


District 19B 










Montgomery 
Randolph 


264 
715 


63,295 
154,108 


17 
36 


2,420 
3,465 


District Totals 


979 


217,403 


53 


5,885 


District 20 










Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 


354 
553 
731 
330 
920 


83,403 
105,831 
172,300 

73,319 
191,843 




28 
20 
12 
35 



3,350 
2,400 
1,500 

3,750 


District Totals 


2,888 


626,696 


95 


11,000 


District 21 










Forsyth 


3,363 


607,366 


48 


6,710 


District Totals 


3,363 


607,366 


48 


6,710 


District 22 










Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 


240 

1,350 

148 

871 


55,765 
334,060 

33,747 
215,391 


4 
46 

1 
7 


1,075 

6,685 

100 

1,150 


District Totals 


2,609 


638,963 


58 


9,010 



67 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Assigned Counsel 



Guardian Ad Litem 



Number of Cases 



District 23 



Alleghany 


62 


Ashe 


163 


Wilkes 


531 


Yadkin 


161 


District Totals 


917 


District 24 




Avery 


199 


Madison 


103 


Mitchell 


64 


Watauga 


237 


Yancey 


58 


District Totals 


661 


District 25 




Burke 


602 


Caldwell 


622 


Catawba 


1,396 


District Totals 


2,620 


District 26 




Mecklenburg 


2,358 


District Totals 


2,358 


District 27 A 




Gaston 


171 


District Totals 


171 


District 27 B 




Cleveland 


524 


Lincoln 


213 


District Totals 


737 


District 28 




Buncombe 


381 


District Totals 


381 


District 29 





Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 

District Totals 



416 
248 
71 
398 
127 

1,260 



Expenditures 



7,546 
20,498 
94,084 

25,759 

147,887 



38,350 
88,589 
14,197 
52,724 
15,635 

209,495 



150,071 
133,182 
294,390 

577,643 



800,535 
800,535 



47,279 
47,279 



120,003 

66,92 1 

186,924 



78,591 
78,591 



105,075 
66,139 
28,280 
98,751 
45,488 

343,733 



Number of Cases 



11 
12 
36 
J8 
77 



25 



5 

4 

_3 

12 



_58 
58 

J£ 
19 



35 
_1 

36 



J6 
16 



9 
7 

4 
__1 
21 



Expenditures 



850 
1,250 
3,325 
1,750 



7,175 



1,950 
1,950 
400 
3,175 
1,195 

8,670 



900 

2,182 

385 

3,467 



13,297 
13,297 



3,295 
3,295 



3,385 
75 

3,460 



1,790 
1,790 



2,837 

1,075 



450 

125 

4,487 



68 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 









Assigned 


Counsel 


Guardian 


Ad Litem 




Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


District 30 














Cherokee 




107 




41,250 


8 


570 


Clay 




19 




6,816 








Graham 




32 




7,607 


6 


400 


Haywood 




369 




104,474 


23 


1,995 


Jackson 




82 




29,041 


13 


861 


Macon 




257 




34,398 


9 


1,435 


Swain 




68 




12,104 


7 


744 


District 


Totals 


934 




235,690 


66 


6,005 


STATE TOTALS 


49,981 




$12,258,375 


1,358 


$183,411 



69 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL 
(Positions and salaries authorized as of June 30, 1987) 



Positions 
-Ulthori/ed 



Salary Ranges 



28 



}9 



so 

6~ 



151 

637 

29 

17 



35 
273 
112 



100 
1,635 



I 

6 
3 

7 
70 

21- 

4 
4 

1 

21 

2 

13 



272 
45 



153 
*fn addition 



SUPREME COl RT 

Justices $ 72,600-74,136* 

Staff personnel (Clerk's and Reporter's offices, 

law clerks, library staff) $ 1 1,652-54,624 

Secretarial personnel $ 23,352-24,348 

COURT OF APPEALS 

Judges $ 68,748-70,284* 

Staff personnel (Clerk's office, prehearing staff, 

Judicial Standards Commission staff, law clerks) $ 13,956-47,580 

Secretarial personnel $ 22,356-23,352 

SUPERIOR COURT 

Judges $ 61,044-63,048* 

Staff personnel $ 18,996-38,004 

Secretarial personnel $ 12,648-27,540 

DISTRICT COURT 

Judges $ 49,428-51,396* 

Magistrates $ 13,404-22,896 

Staff personnel $ 13,668-21,156 

Secretarial personnel $ 13,152-23,100 

DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 

District Attorneys S 56,784* 

Staff personnel $ 17,472-36,732 

Secretarial personnel $ 13,152-23,100 

CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 

Clerks of Superior Court $ 33,072-49,068* 

Staff personnel $ 13,152-28,176 

INDIGENT REPRESENTATION 

Appellate Defender $ 56,784 

Assistant Appellate Defenders $ 26,508-38,508 

Secretarial personnel $ 14,244-21,156 

Public Defenders $ 56,784* 

Staff personnel $ 16,104-36,732 

Secretarial personnel $ 13,152-23,100 

Special counsel at mental hospitals $ 11,034-28,644 

Secretarial personnel S 12,648-19,416 

Guardian ad Litem, Program Administrator $ 37,584 

Program Coordinators $ 9,918-23,100 

Program Analyst $ 1 1,550-20,700 

Secretarial personnel $ 6,324-15,792 

JUVENILE PROBATION AND AFTERCARE 

Court counselors $ 18,192-41,736 

Secretarial personnel $ 13,152-23,100 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

Administrative Officer of the Courts S 63,048 

Assistant Director $ 51,396 

Staff personnel S 13,152-63,000 

to the salaries given here, these categories are entitled to a longevity allowance for years of service. 



70 



PART IV 
TRIAL COURTS CASEFLOW DATA 

• Superior Court Division 

• District Court Division 



TRIAL COURTS CASE DATA 



This part of the Annual Report presents pertinent data 
on a district-by-district and county-by-county basis. For 
ease of reference, this part is divided into a superior court 
division section and a district court division section. 

The data within the two sections generally parallel each 
other in terms of organization, with each section subdi- 
vided into civil and criminal case categories. With some 
exceptions, there are three basic data tables for each case 
category: a caseload inventory (filings, dispositions and 
pending) table; a table on the manner of dispositions; and a 
table on ages of cases disposed of during the year and ages 
of cases pending at the end of the year. Pending and age 
data are not provided for district court motor vehicle crim- 
inal cases, for civil cases (small claims) referred to magis- 
trates, and for juvenile cases, inasmuch as these categories 
of cases are not reported by case file number. 

The caseload inventory tables provide a statistical pic- 
ture of caseflow during the 1986-87 year. Items recorded in 
this table include the number of cases pending at the begin- 
ning of the year, the number of new cases filed, the number 
of cases disposed of during the year, and the number of 
cases left pending at the end of the year. The caseload 
inventory also shows the total caseload (the number pend- 
ing at the beginning of the year plus the number filed during 
the year) and the percentage of the caseload which was 
disposed of during the year. 

The aging tables show the ages of the cases pending on 
June 30, 1987 as well as the ages of the cases disposed of 
during 1986-87. These tables also show both mean (aver- 
age) and median ages for each set of cases — those pending 
at the end of the year and those that were disposed of during 
the year. The median age of a group of cases is, by defini- 
tion, the age of a hypothetical case which is older than 50% 
of the total set of cases and younger than the other 50%. 

Unlike the median, the mean age can be substantially 
raised (or lowered) if even a small number of very old (or 
very young) cases are included. For example, if only a 
single two-year old case was included among ten cases aged 
three months, the median age would be 90 days and the 
mean (average) age would be 148.2 days. A substantial 
difference between the median and average ages, therefore. 



indicates the presence of a number of rather long-pending, 
or short-pending, cases. 

The case statistics in Part IV have been calculated from 
filing and disposition case data submitted to the Adminis- 
trative Office of the Courts (AOC) by the 100 clerks of 
superior court across the State. The present case reporting 
system is primarily a manual one: weekly reports from each 
clerk's office are mailed to Raleigh, where they are 
computer-coded, entered and processed. Pending case 
information is computer-calculated from the filing and 
disposition data. The accuracy of the pending case figures 
is, of course, dependent upon timely and accurate filing and 
disposition data. 

Periodic comparisons by clerk personnel of their actual 
pending case files against AOC's computer-produced pend- 
ing case lists, followed by indicated corrections, is necessary 
to maintain completely accurate data in the AOC computer 
file. Yet, staff resource in the clerks' offices is not sufficient 
to make such physical inventory checks as frequently and 
as completely as would be necessary to maintain full accu- 
racy in AOC's computer files. Thus, it is recognized that 
some of the figures published in the following tables have 
errors of some degree. 

Another accuracy-related problem inherent in a manual 
reporting system is the lack of absolute consistency in the 
published year-end and year-beginning pending figures. 
The number of cases pending at the end of a reporting year 
should ideally be identical with the number of published 
pending cases at the beginning of the next reporting year. In 
reality, this is rarely the case. Experience has shown that 
inevitably some filings and dispositions which occurred in 
the preceding year do not get reported until the subsequent 
year. The later-reported data is regarded as being more 
complete reporting and is used, thereby producing some 
differences between the prior year's end-pending figures 
and the current year's beginning-pending figures. 

Notwithstanding the indicated limitations in the data 
reporting and data-processing system, it is believed that the 
published figures are sufficiently adequate to fully justify 
their use. In any event, the published figures are the best 
and most accurate data currently available. 



73 



PART IV, Section 1 



Superior Court Division 
Caseflow Data 



The Superior Court Division 



This section contains data tables and accompanying 
charts depicting the caseflow during the 1986-87 year of 
cases pending, filed, and disposed of in the State's super- 
ior courts; that is, cases before superior court judges. 
Data is also presented on cases pending, filed and dis- 
posed of before the 100 clerks of superior court, who have 
original jurisdiction over estate cases and special pro- 
ceedings. 

There are, for statistical reporting purposes, three cate- 
gories of cases filed in the superior courts: civil cases, 
felony cases which are within the original jurisdiction of 
the superior courts, and misdemeanor appeals from the 
district courts to superior courts, for trial de novo. 

During 1986-87, as in previous years, the greatest pro- 
portion of superior court filings were felonies (51.8%), 
followed by misdemeanor appeals (32.6%) and civil cases 
(15.6%). The general trend over the past decade has been 
for increases in the total number of case filings. During 
1986-87, total case filings in superior courts increased by 
8.3% from the proceeding fiscal year (from 91,336 total 
cases to 98,886). Filings of civil cases increased by 1.6%, 
felony filings increased by 13.8%, and misdemeanor 
appeal filings increased by 3.4%. 

As in previous years, superior court civil cases generally 
take much longer to dispose of than do criminal cases. 
During 1986-87, the median age at disposition of civil 
cases was 299 days, compared to a median age at disposi- 
tion of 91 days for felonies and 71 days for misdemeanors. 
A similar pattern exists for the ages of pending cases. The 
median ages of superior court cases pending at the end of 
the fiscal year, June 30, 1 987, was 224 days for civil cases, 
88 days for felonies, and 83 days for misdemeanors. 

These differences in the median ages of civil versus 
criminal cases in superior courts can be attributed in part 
to the priority given criminal cases. In criminal cases, a 
defendant has a right to a "speedy trial" guaranteed by 
both the United States and North Carolina Constitutions 
and by the North Carolina Speedy Trial Act (G.S. 15A- 
701 et seq.). The Speedy Trial Act requires cases to go to 
trail within 120 days of filing unless there has been justifi- 
able delay for one or more of the reasons set out in the 
statute. During 1986-87, 48 criminal cases were dismissed 
under the Speedy Trial Act, a decrease of 1 1 . 1 % as com- 
pared to the 54 cases which were dismissed under the Act 
during 1985-86. 

There is no comparable statutory standard for speedy 
disposition of civil cases in North Carolina, although the 
North Carolina Constitution does provide that "right and 
justice shall be administered without favor, denial, or 
delay" (Article I, Section 18, N.C. Constitution). 



Comparing 1986-87 median-age data with the same 
information from 1985-86, it is seen that the median ages 
at disposition have increased for both civil and criminal 
cases. From 1985-86 to 1986-87, the median ages at dispo- 
sition increased for civil cases, from 289 to 299 days; 
increased for felonies, from 86 to 91 days; and increased 
for misdemeanors, from 67 to 71 days. As to the ages of 
cases pending on June 30, 1987, compared to the ages of 
cases pending on June 30, 1986, it is seen that the median 
ages of pending cases have remained the same for civil 
cases, but increased for felonies and misdemeanors. The 
median age of civil cases pending in the superior courts on 
June 30, 1987 was 224 days, matching the 224 days on 
June 30, 1986; for felonies, 88 days on June 30, 1987, 
compared to 83 days on June 30, 1986; and for misde- 
meanors, 83 days on June 30, 1987, compared to 74 days 
on June 30, 1986. 

The three major case categories (civil, felonies, and 
misdemeanors) may be broken down into more specific 
case types. 

Negligence cases comprised 45.3% of total civil filings 
in superior courts (6,986 of 15,408 total civil filings). 
Contract cases comprised the next largest category of civil 
case filings, 24.2% (3,737 filings). 

Felony case filings were dominated by controlled sub- 
stance violation, 19.9% (10,191 of 51,210 total filings), 
burglary, 17.6% (8,995 filings), and forgery and utterings, 
13.7% (7,032 filings). 

Non-motor vehicle appeals comprised 52.5% of mis- 
demeanor filings in superior courts ( 1 6,941 of 32,268 total 
filings). 

Tables which follow present data on the manner of 
disposition of superior court cases. Jury trials continue to 
account for a low percentage of case dispositions: 6.2% of 
civil cases (949 of 15,172 civil dispositions); 4.0% of felo- 
nies (1,950 of 48,890 felony dispositions); and 3.5%) of 
misdemeanors (1,122 of 32,246 misdemeanor disposi- 
tions). Over half (54.3%) of all civil dispositions were by 
voluntary dismissal (8,239 of 1 5, 1 72 civil dispositions). As 
in previous years, most criminal cases are disposed of by 
guilty plea; 62.7% of all felony (30,593 of 48,890), and 
36.2% of all misdemeanor dispositions ( 1 1 ,657 of 32,246) 
were by guilty plea, with most of these being to the offense 
as charged. 



77 



CASELOAD TRENDS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

1977—1986-87 



100 



on 



T 8 ° 
H 

O 

U ~(> 

s 

\ 

N 

I) 

s 




Filings 



60 



O 50 
F 



40 



30 



20 



10 



Dispositions 



End Pending 



77 78 78-79 79-80 80-81 



,1-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 



Following a slower rate of increase in the early 1980's, 
filings and dispositions in superior court appear to have 
resumed the earlier pattern of significant annual increases. 



During 1986-87, filings increased by 8.3% and dispositions 
by 9.3% over the 1985-86 year. 



78 



SUPERIOR COURT CASELOAD 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



T 

H 

() 

U 

s 

A 
N 
ID 
S 

o 

F 



A 
S 
F 
S 



60 



50 



40 



30 



20 



10 



Begin Pending 
Filings 
Dispositions 
End Pending 



51,210 



48,890 



15 - 408 ,< m 
14,867 ■» l5 < 172 15,103 



16,122 




32,268 32,246 



18,442 






9,111 



9,133 



.JSJKJV] 



CIVIL 



FELONIES 



MISDEMEANORS 



Compared to last year, superior court filings increased in 
all categories. During fiscal year 1986-87, felony filings 
increased 13.8%, misdemeanor filings 3.4%, and civil fil- 
ings 1.6%. Dispositions also increased in each category, 



leaving 42,678 cases pending in superior court on June 30, 
1987, a 6.2% increase from the number of cases pending 
on June 30, 1986. 



79 



MEDIAN AGES OF SUPERIOR COURT CASES 

Median Ages (in days) of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 



CIVIL 



224.00 



FELONY 



MISDEMEANOR 




Median Ages (in days) of Cases Disposed of During 1986-87 



CIVIL 




299.00 



FELONY 




91.0 



MISDEMEANOR 




71.0 



50 



100 



150 



200 



250 



300 



The median age is the age with respect to which 50% of all 
cases in the category are younger and 50% of all cases are 
older than the median age; it is the 50th percentile of ages 
of all cases in the category. As shown in the above graphs, 
the median ages of all civil superior court cases pending 



and disposed during fiscal year 1986-87 are greater than 
the median ages of criminal superior court cases pending 
and disposed. Civil cases take longer to process than do 
criminal cases. 



80 



T 

H 
() 

U 

s 

A 

N 
D 

S 



() 
F 



C 

A 
S 
E 

S 



CASELOAD TRENDS OF CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

1977 - 1986-87 



16 



14 



12 



10 



End Pending 




Filings 



77 78 78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 



Civil filings in the superior courts increased 1.6% (251 increase (188 cases) in end pending cases as of June 30, 

cases) in comparison to the 1985-86 year. Dispositions 1987. 

increased sharply by 7.7%, which accounted for the small 



XI 



FILINGS OF CIVIL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS — BY TYPE OF CASE 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Collection on Account 
(1,087) 



Motor Vehicle 

Negligence 

(4,857) 




Contract 

(3,737) 



Other Negligence 
(2,129) 



Other 
(1,995) 



2.7% Administrative Appeal 
(413) 
Real Property 
(1,190) 



As was the case for the past two years, almost half (45.3%) 
of the civil cases filed statewide during 1986-87 were 
negligence cases (6,986 of the 15,408 total filings). The 



"other" category includes non-negligent torts such as 
conversion of property, civil fraud, and civil assault. 



82 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Begin 
Pending 

7/1/86 



Filed 



Total 
Caseload 



Disposed 



% Caseload 
Disposed 



End 
Pending 

6/30/87 



District 1 



Camden 


9 


11 


20 


7 


35. OS 


13 


Chowan 


40 


22 


62 


30 


48.4% 


32 


Currituck 


33 


37 


70 


27 


38.6% 


43 


Dare 


106 


99 


205 


101 


49.31 


104 


Gates 


11 


13 


24 


11 


45.8% 


13 


Pasquotank 


65 


49 


114 


56 


49.1% 


58 


Perquimans 


17 


17 


34 


19 


55.9% 


15 


District Totals 


281 


248 


529 


251 


47.4% 


278 


District 2 














Beaufort 


88 


73 


161 


77 


47.8% 


84 


Hyde 


13 


11 


24 


6 


25.0% 


18 


Martin 


42 


41 


83 


30 


36.1% 


53 


Tyrrell 


11 


7 


18 


10 


55.6% 


8 


Washington 


43 


17 


60 


29 


48. 31 


31 


District Totals 


197 


149 


346 


152 


43.9% 


194 


District 3 














Carteret 


179 


188 


367 


154 


42.0% 


213 


Craven 


189 


218 


407 


197 


48.4% 


210 


Pamlico 


12 


15 


27 


12 


44.4% 


15 


Pitt 


267 


334 


601 


319 


53.1% 


282 


District Totals 


647 


755 


1,402 


682 


48.6% 


720 


District 4 














Duplin 


89 


83 


172 


71 


41.3% 


101 


Jones 


27 


13 


40 


21 


52.5% 


19 


Onslow 


267 


270 


537 


203 


37.8% 


334 


Sampson 


70 


82 


152 


82 


53.9% 


70 


District Totals 


453 


448 


901 


377 


41.8% 


524 


District 5 















New Hanover 
Pender 



395 

39 



403 
41 



798 

80 



363 

31 



45.5% 
38.8% 



435 

49 



District Totals 



434 



444 



878 



394 



44.9% 



484 



District 6 




Bertie 


25 


Halifax 


74 


Hertford 


54 


Northampton 


34 


District Totals 


187 


District 7 




Edgecombe 


97 


Nash 


171 


Wilson 


129 


District Totals 


397 


District 8 




Greene 


34 


Lenoir 


194 


Wayne 


223 



38 


63 


33 


90 


164 


80 


34 


88 


55 


30 


64 


25 



192 



385 



379 



782 



193 



127 


224 


107 


148 


319 


170 


110 


239 


119 



396 



32 


66 


25 


201 


395 


190 


200 


423 


207 



52.4% 
48.8% 
62.5% 
39.1% 

50.9% 



47.8% 
53.3% 
49.8% 

50.6% 



30 
84 
33 
39 

186 



117 
149 
120 

386 



37.9% 


41 


48.1% 


205 


48.9% 


216 



District Totals 



451 



433 



884 



422 



47.7% 



462 



83 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Begin 
Pending 

7/1/86 



Filed 



Total 
Caseload 



Disposed 



% Caseload 
Disposed 



End 
Pending 

6/30/87 



District 9 



Franklin 


57 


59 


116 


38 


32.8% 


78 


Granville 


49 


53 


102 


56 


54.9% 


46 


Person 


37 


59 


96 


39 


40. 6% 


57 


Vance 


47 


68 


115 


52 


45. 2% 


63 


Warren 


36 


33 


69 


33 


47.8% 


36 


District Totals 


226 


272 


498 


218 


43.8% 


280 


District 10 














Wake 


1,283 


1,442 


2,725 


1,261 


46.3% 


1,464 


District 11 














Harnett 


106 


134 


240 


117 


48.8% 


123 


Johnston 


163 


214 


377 


190 


50.4% 


187 


Lee 


81 


95 


176 


100 


56.8% 


76 


District Totals 


350 


443 


793 


407 


51.3% 


386 


District 12 















Cumberland 
Hoke 

District Totals 



537 

16 

553 



374 
18 

392 



911 

34 

945 



432 
15 

447 



47.4% 
44.1% 

47.3% 



479 
19 

498 



District 13 




Bladen 


30 


Brunswick 


95 


Columbus 


157 


District Totals 


282 


District 14 




Durham 


560 


District 15A 




Alamance 


186 


District 15B 




Chatham 


43 


Orange 


137 


District Totals 


180 


District 16 




Robeson 


208 


\ -. o 1 1 a , r i d 


',2 


District Totals 


270 


District 17A 




Caswell 


13 


Rockingham 


101 


District Totals 


114 


District 17B 




Stores 


22 


Surry 


« 



43 


73 


51 


99 


194 


68 


119 


276 


115 



261 



District Totals 



85 



233 



189 
49 

238 



12 

119 

131 



26 
105 

131 



543 



413 



397 
111 

508 



25 
220 

245 



48 

168 

216 



234 



552 


1,112 


523 


166 


352 


156 


35 

198 


78 
335 


41 
163 



204 



218 
68 

286 



14 
133 

147 



27 

98 

125 



69.9% 
35.1% 
41.7% 

43.1% 



47.0% 



44.3% 



52.6% 
48.7% 

49.4% 



54.9% 
61.3% 

56.3% 



56.0% 
60.5% 

60.0% 



56.3% 
58.3% 

57.9% 



22 
126 
161 

309 
589 
196 



37 
172 

209 



179 
43 

222 



11 
87 



21 

70 

91 



84 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Begin 
Pending 

7/1/86 



Filed 



Total 
Caseload 



Disposed 





End 


% Caseload 


Pending 


Disposed 


6/30/87 



District 18 



Guilford 


968 


District 19A 




Cabarrus 


131 


Rowan 


133 


District Totals 


264 


District 19B 




Montgomery 


23 


Randolph 


110 


District Totals 


133 


District 20 




Anson 


59 


Moore 


156 


Richmond 


96 


Stanly 


69 


Union 


148 


District Totals 


528 


District 21 




Forsyth 


478 


District 22 




Alexander 


28 


Davidson 


131 


Davie 


35 


Iredell 


153 


District Totals 


347 


District 23 




Alleghany 


8 


Ashe 


16 


Wilkes 


148 


Yadkin 


34 


District Totals 


206 


District 24 




Avery 


48 


Madison 


94 


Mitchell 


32 


Watauga 


59 


Yancey 


15 


District Totals 


248 


District 25 




Burke 


164 


Caldwell 


170 


Catawba 


250 


District Totals 


584 


District 26 





1,005 



146 
168 

314 



20 
103 

123 



442 



212 



221 



1,973 



277 

301 

578 



43 
213 

256 



789 



418 



469 



1,146 



146 

149 

295 



27 
121 

148 



58 


117 


50 


88 


244 


144 


82 


178 


86 


60 


129 


50 


151 


299 


141 


439 


967 


471 


707 


1,185 


664 


36 


64 


31 


161 


292 


165 


32 


67 


40 


213 


366 


206 



442 



15 


23 


10 


19 


35 


22 


138 


286 


161 


40 


74 


34 



227 



40 


88 


36 


37 


131 


57 


18 


50 


28 


103 


162 


68 


23 


38 


12 



201 



Mecklenburg 



2,237 



157 
178 
293 


321 
348 
543 


178 
174 

321 


628 


1,212 


673 


256 


4,493 


2,150 



58.1* 



52.7% 
49.5% 

51.0% 



62.8% 
56.8% 

57.8% 



48.7% 



56.0% 



56.0% 



54.3% 



40.9% 
43.5% 
56.0% 
42.0% 
31.6% 

42.9% 



55.5% 



47.9% 



827 



131 
152 

283 



16 
92 

108 



42.7% 


67 


59.0% 


100 


48.3% 


92 


38.8% 


79 


47.2% 


158 



496 



521 



48.4% 


33 


56.5% 


127 


59.7% 


27 


56.3% 


160 



347 



43.5% 


13 


62.9% 


13 


56.3% 


125 


45.9% 


40 



191 



52 
74 
22 
94 

26 

268 



55.5% 


143 


50.0% 


174 


59.1% 


222 



539 



2,343 



85 



District 27A 



Gaston 


355 


District 27B 




Cleveland 


137 


Lincoln 


4Q 


District Totals 


186 


District 28 




3uncombe 


401 


District 29 




Henderson 


156 


McDowell 


64 


Polk 


24 


Rutherford 


96 


Transylvania 


73 


District Totals 


413 


District 30 





CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Begin End 

Pending Total % Caseload Pending 

7/1/86 Filed Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/87 



531 886 500 56.4% 386 

135 272 158 58.1* 114 

63 112 57 50.9% 55 

198 384 215 56.0% 169 

473 874 538 61.6% 336 



124 


280 


134 


42 


106 


42 


14 


38 


26 


62 


158 


73 


47 


120 


49 



Cherokee 39 24 63 32 

Clay 10 9 19 8 

Graham 27 18 45 21 

Haywood 142 79 221 108 

Jackson 58 42 100 51 

Macon 78 53 131 49 

Swain 29 30 59 34 

District Totals 383 255 638 303 

State Totals 14,867 15,408 30,275 15,172 



47.9% 


146 


39.6% 


64 


68.4% 


12 


46.2% 


85 


40.8% 


71 



289 702 324 46.2% 378 



50.8% 


31 


42.1% 


11 


46.7% 


24 


48.9% 


113 


51.0% 


49 


37.4% 


82 


57.6% 


25 


47.5% 


335 


50.1% 


15,103 



86 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Trial by Judge 
(2,087) 



Voluntary 

Dismissal 

(8,239) 




Trial by Jury (949) 



Other (519) 



Clerk (1,061) 



Final Order or 

Judgment Without 

Trial (Judge) 

(2,317) 



As in previous years, voluntary dismissals account for the 
largest number of civil case dispositions in superior 
courts. The next most prominent category, pretrial orders 
and judgments by the judge, includes summary and con- 
sent judgments, and orders changing venue. The "other" 



category includes miscellaneous dispositions such as dis- 
continuance for lack of service of process under Civil 
Rule 4(e), dismissal on motion of the court, and removal 
to federal court. 



87 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 







Trial 


by 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 


Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 








Jury 


Judge 


Total Disp 


District 1 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 




1 
2 



1 
5 

1 




2 

10 

1b 

10 

1 


2 
12 

9 
56 

7 
26 

7 


2 
8 

5 
14 



7 

6 


1 
5 
2 
3 
2 
10 
2 


11 


2 


7 

30 
27 
101 
11 
56 
19 


District 
% of Tots 


Totals 
1 


9 
3. 6 J 


39 
15.5% 


119 
47.4% 


42 
16.7% 


25 
10.0% 


17 
6.8% 


251 
100.0% 


District 2 

3eaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 




5 

1 





3 



2 
4 


39 

2 

14 

1 

7 


23 
1 

14 
4 

16 


3 
3 

l 


2 


4 



3 




77 
6 
30 
10 
29 


District Totals 
J of Total 


6 
3.91 


9 
5.9% 


63 
41.4% 


58 
38.2% 


9 
5.9% 


7 
4.6% 


152 
100.0% 


District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 






8 



20 


2 b 

21 



58 


74 

100 

8 

174 


21 

35 
2 

44 


13 

20 
1 

23 


12 

13 

1 




154 

197 

12 

319 


District 
% of Tot. 


Totals 
il 


36 
5.3% 


105 
15.4% 


356 
52.2% 


102 
15.0% 


57 
8.4% 


26 
3.8% 


682 

100.0% 


District 4 
C j p 1 : r. 
.' ^r.es 
Onslow 
Sampson 





12 
6 


1 



9 

16 


36 
10 
9 9 
51 


9 

4 

60 

3 


8 

6 

22 

5 


3 

1 
1 
1 


71 

21 

203 

82 


District Totals 
% of Total 


32 
8.55 


26 
6.9% 


196 
52.0% 


76 
20.2% 


41 
10.9% 


6 
1.6% 


377 
100.0% 


District 5 
New Hanover 

? e '. i e r 


2" 
1 


72 
1 


207 
16 


54 
11 


8 



1 
2 


363 
31 


District Totals 
% of Total 


22 
5.6% 


73 
18.5% 


223 
56.6% 


65 
16.5% 


8 
2.0% 


3 

0.8% 


394 
100.0% 


District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northamptor 




1 

4 
2 


2 

15 
3 

5 


16 

34 
J3 
10 


9 

17 

7 

i 


4 
8 
3 

2 


1 

2 
5 

1 


33 
80 
55 
25 


District 
% of Tot; 


Totals 

il 


11 
5.7% 


29 
15.0% 


93 
48.2% 


34 
17.6% 


17 
8.8% 


9 
4.7% 


193 
100.0% 


District 7 
Edgecombe 
Mash 
Wil3on 




3 

5 
5 


7 

11 
13 


65 

78 


22 
62 
23 


8 

12 
12 


2 
2 

2 


107 
170 
119 


District Totals 
% of Total 


17 
4.3% 


31 
7.8% 


203 
51.3% 


107 
27.0% 


32 
8.1% 


6 
1.5% 


396 
100.0% 



KH 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Trial by 



Jury 



Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



Other 



Total Dispositions 



District 8 



Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



12 

13 


District Totals 
% of Total 


25 
5.9% 


District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 


5 
2 
3 
2 
2 


District Totals 
% of Total 


14 
6.4$ 


District 10 
Wake 

% of Total 


61 
4.8? 


District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 


14 
14 
13 


District Totals 
% of Total 


. 41 
10.1% 


District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 


19 
1 


District Totals 
% of Total 


20 
4.5% 


District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 


3 

5 
9 


District Totals 
% of Total 


17 
7.3% 


District 14 
Durham 

% of Total 


28 

5.4% 


District 15A 




Alamance 
% of Total 


7 
4.5% 


District 15B 




Chatham 
Orange 


2 
11 


District Totals 
% of Total 


13 
6.4% 


District 16 






9 

19 

28 
6.6% 





6 

12 

14 

3 

35 
16.1% 



279 
22.1% 



Robeson 
Scotland 



28 
1 



14 




22 

5.4% 



67 
8 

75 
16.8% 



8 
15 
23 

46 
19.7% 



22 
4.2% 



3 
1.9% 



5 

26 

31 
15.2% 



55 

11 



13 
108 

121 

242 
57.3% 



23 
30 
16 
29 
19 

117 
53.7% 



614 
48.7% 



68 
85 
57 

210 
51.6% 



253 
6 

259 
57.9% 



26 
41 
66 

133 
56.8% 



297 
56.8% 



87 
55.8% 



27 
95 

122 
59.8% 



123 
40 



9 
35 

34 

78 
18.5% 



8 
11 
6 
5 
7 

37 
17.0% 



102 
8.1% 



15 
70 
19 

104 
25.6% 



52 


52 
11.6% 



12 
6 

1 

19 
8.1% 



108 
20.7% 



55 
35.3% 



6 

20 

26 
12.7% 



2 
15 




26 

20 

46 
10.9% 



127 

10.1% 



5 
19 

i 

25 
6.1% 



16 


16 



1 
1 
8 

10 
4.3% 



51 



3 

1.9% 




7 

7 

3.4% 



3 



3 

0.7% 




5 
1 
2 

1 

9 
4.1% 



78 

6.2% 



1 

2 
2 

5 
1.2% 



25 


25 
5.6% 



17 
3.3% 



1 
0.6% 



1 
4 

5 
2.5% 



25 
190 
207 

422 
100.0% 



38 
56 
39 
52 
33 

218 
100.0% 



1,261 
100.0% 



117 
190 
100 

407 
100.0% 



432 
15 

447 
100.0% 



51 

68 

115 

234 
100.0% 



523 

100.0% 



156 

100.0% 



41 
163 

204 
100.0% 



218 
68 



District Totals 
% of Total 



29 

10.1% 



66 
23.1% 



163 
57.0% 



17 
5.9% 



7 
2.4% 



4 

1.4% 



286 
100.0% 



89 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 





Trial 


by 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 


Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 






Jury 


Judge 


Total Disp 


restrict "~A 


1 
4 




21 


8 

59 


5 

33 



11 



5 




Caswell 
Rockingham 


14 
133 


District Totals 
X of Total 


5 
3.4X 


21 
14.3% 


67 
45. 6% 


38 
25. 9X 


11 
7.5X 


5 
3.4X 


147 
100. OX 


District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 


6 
9 


2 
7 


13 

57 


6 
13 



12 






27 
98 


District Totals 
X of Total 


15 
12. OX 


9 
7.2X 


70 
56. OX 


19 
15.2% 


12 
9.6X 




o.ox 


125 
100. ox 


District 18 
Guilford 
X of Total 


54 
4.7X 


262 
22. 9X 


618 
53. 9% 


91 
7.9X 


45 
3.9X 


76 
6.6X 


1,146 

100. ox 


District 1 9A 

Cabarrus 
Rowan 


3 

12 


17 

3 


98 
81 


19 
44 


8 
4 


1 
5 


146 
149 


District Totals 
X of Total 


15 
5. IX 


20 
6.8X 


179 
60. 7% 


63 
21. 4X 


12 
4.1X 


6 
2. 0X 


295 
100.0% 


District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 



11 


3 

20 


17 

58 


2 

21 


3 

8 


2 
3 


27 
121 


District Totals 
X of Total 


11 
7.4X 


23 
15.5? 


75 
50. 7X 


23 
15.5% 


11 
7.4X 


5 
3.4X 


148 
100.0% 


District 20 
Anson 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 


3 

4 
14 


8 

21 
28 
13 
25 


27 
101 

41 
27 
7 4 


10 

8 

4 

6 

14 


2 
7 
9 


12 



3 
3 

2 


50 

144 

86 

50 

141 


District Totals 
X of Total 


26 
5.5X 


95 
20. 2X 


270 
57. 3X 


42 
8.9X 


30 
6.4X 


8 
1.7X 


471 
100. ox 


District 21 
Forsyth 

X of Total 


44 
6.6X 


34 
5.1X 


345 
52. OX 


139 
20. 9X 


51 
7.7X 


51 
7.7X 


664 
100. ox 


District 22 
Alexander 

C a - . - -, -, ' 

Davie 

Iredell 


4 

3 
5 




21 

7 

28 


13 
92 

23 

99 


10 

41 

3 

28 


2 

7 

3 

36 


2 

1 

12 


31 
165 

40 
206 


District Totals 
X of Total 


14 
3.2X 


56 
12.7% 


227 

51. 4X 


82 
18.6% 


48 
10.9% 


15 
3.4X 


442 
100. OX 


District 23 
Alleghany 
Ashe 
» . Lkes 
( adk ir 


2 

7 

2 


2 
6 
2 
2 


3 

12 
85 
18 


l 

4 
56 

10 





11 

2 


2 





10 
22 

161 
34 


District Total3 
X of Total 


11 

..8X 


12 
5.3X 


118 
52. OX 


71 
31.3% 


13 
5.7X 


2 
0.9X 


227 
100. ox 



90 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 





Trial 


by 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 


Judge's 

Final Order 

or Judgment 

without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 






Jury 


Judge 


Total Disp 


District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 




13 

1 

2 

1 


1 
2 
2 
5 



23 

13 

16 

38 

7 


12 
23 

8 

14 

2 



1 


4 

1 




5 
1 

5 
1 


36 
57 
28 
68 
12 


District Totals 
% of Total 


17 
8.5% 


10 
5.0% 


97 
48.3% 


59 
29.4% 


6 
3.0% 


12 
6.0% 


201 
100.0% 


District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 


17 

9 
12 


34 
8 

34 


99 

95 

174 


18 
39 
61 


6 

15 
36 


4 
8 

4 


178 
174 
321 


District Totals 
% of Total 


38 
5.65 


76 
11.3% 


368 

54.7% 


118 
17.5% 


57 
8.5% 


16 
2.4% 


673 
100.0% 


District 26 
Mecklenburg 
% of Total 


128 

6.0* 


267 
12.4% 


1342 
62.4% 


218 
10.1% 


170 
7.9% 


25 

1.2% 


2,150 
100.0% 


District 27A 
Gaston 

% of Total 


51 
10.2% 


91 
18.2% 


296 
59.2% 


21 
4.2% 


24 
4.8% 


17 
3.4% 


500 
100.0% 


District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 


7 

1 


31 

4 


80 
26 


22 
22 


7 
3 


11 
1 


158 

57 


District Totals 
% of Total 


8 
3.7% 


35 

16.3% 


106 
49.3% 


44 
20.5% 


10 
4.7% 


12 

5.6% 


215 
100.0% 


District 28 
Buncombe 
% of Total 


60 
11.2% 


83 
15.4% 


252 
46.8% 


92 
17.1% 


31 
5.8% 


20 
3.7% 


538 
100.0% 


District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


17 

5 
2 
4 
5 


7 

2 

1 

18 

2 


68 
12 
14 
36 
35 


25 
22 

6 
11 

4 


10 

1 
1 

2 
3 


7 


2 
2 




134 

42 
26 
73 

49 


District Totals 
% of Total 


33 

10.2% 


30 
9.3% 


165 
50.9% 


68 
21.0% 


17 
5.2% 


11 
3.4% 


324 
100.0% 


District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 


3 
1 
2 
13 
7 
2 
3 


3 



4 

21 

4 

10 
2 


12 
6 
9 
55 
27 
22 
16 


9 
1 
4 

6 

10 
9 
8 


4 



1 

13 

1 

4 
3 


l 


1 



2 
2 
2 


32 
8 
21 
108 
51 
49 
34 


District Totals 
% of Total 


31 
10.2% 


44 
14.5% 


147 
48.5% 


47 
15.5% 


26 
8.6% 


8 
2.6% 


303 
100.0% 


State Totals 
% of Total 


949 

6.3% 


2,087 

13.8% 


8,239 
54.3% 


2,317 
15.3% 


1,061 
7.0% 


519 
3.4% 


15,172 
100.0% 



91 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



District Totals 



<i: 



171 



61.5% 



12-24 



% 



66 



23.7% 



>24 



9 


69.2% 


2 


15.4% 


2 


15.4% 


13 


MO. 6% 


14 


43.8% 


5 


15.6% 


31 


72.1% 


8 


18.6% 


4 


9.3% 


oS 


65.4% 


21 


20.2% 


15 


14.4% 


3 


61.5% 


3 


23.1% 


2 


15.4% 


31 


53.4% 


16 


27.6% 


11 


19.0% 


11 


73.3% 


2 


13.3% 


2 


13.3% 



41 



14.7% 



Total 


Mean 


Median 


Pending 


Age (Days) 


Age (Days) 


13 


332.4 


210.0 


32 


500.4 


422.5 


43 


288.0 


204.0 


104 


366.3 


240.5 


13 


433.2 


301.0 


58 


401.2 


310.5 


15 


317.9 


175.0 



278 



375.9 



264.5 



District 2 



3eaufort 




4 3 


57.1% 


26 


31.0% 


10 


11.9% 


84 


414.3 


306.5 


Hyde 




7 


38.9% 


5 


27.8% 


6 


33.3% 


18 


695.6 


527.0 


Martin 




33 


62.3% 


11 


20.8% 


9 


17.0% 


53 


473.6 


316.0 


Tyrrell 




2 


25.0% 


1 


12.5% 


5 


62.5% 


8 


739.4 


920.5 


Washington 




13 


41.9% 


17 


54.8% 


1 


3.2% 


31 


372.5 


439.0 


District 


Totals 


103 


53.1% 


60 


30.9% 


31 


16.0% 


194 


463.3 


351.0 


District 3 






















Carteret 




143 


67.1% 


56 


26.3% 


14 


6.6% 


213 


297.7 


250.0 


Craven 




143 


68.1% 


53 


25.2% 


14 


6.7% 


210 


321.9 


242.0 


Pamlico 




11 


73.3% 


1 


6.7% 


3 


20.0% 


15 


457.1 


154.0 


Pitt 




210 


74.5% 


43 


15.2% 


29 


10.3% 


282 


292.5 


192.5 


District 


Totals 


507 


70.4% 


153 


21.3% 


60 


8.3% 


720 


306.1 


225.0 


District 4 






















Duplin 




60 


59.4% 


31 


30.7% 


10 


9.9% 


101 


362.4 


307.0 


Jones 




9 


47.4% 


5 


26.3% 


5 


26.3% 


19 


783.6 


376.0 


Onslow 




211 


63.2% 


75 


22.5% 


48 


14.4% 


334 


389.6 


262.5 


Sampson 




50 


71.4% 


14 


20.0% 


6 


8.6% 


70 


295.8 


214.0 


District 


Totals 


330 


63.0% 


125 


23.9% 


69 


13.2% 


524 


386.1 


266.0 


District 5 






















New Hanover 




288 


66.2% 


1 1 1 


25.5% 


36 


8.3% 


435 


301.9 


246.0 


Pender 




34 


69.4% 


1 1 


22.4% 


4 


8.2% 


49 


278.0 


218.0 


District 


Totals 


322 


66.5% 


122 


25.2% 


40 


8.3% 


484 


299.5 


244.0 


District 6 























Bertie 24 80.0% 4 13.3% 2 6.7% 

Halifax 60 71.4% 17 20.2% 7 8.3% 

Hertford 15 45.5% 13 39.4% 5 15.2% 

Northampton 22 56.4% 11 28.2% 6 15.4% 

District Totals 121 65.1% 45 24.2% 20 10.8% 



30 
84 
33 
39 

186 



230.0 
287.0 
509.2 
408.8 

342.7 



115.0 
209.0 
379.0 
355.0 

227.0 



District 7 












Edgecombe 


86 


73.5% 


26 


22.2% 


5 


Nash 


Yi 


66.4% 


38 


25.5% 


12 


Wilson 


67 


55.8% 


nu 


36.7% 


9 


District Totals 


252 


65.3% 


108 


28.0% 


26 


District 8 












Greene 


VJ 


46.3% 


20 


48.8% 


2 


>.'.'^r 


130 


63.4% 


63 


30.7% 


12 


/. % / ' H 


139 


64.4% 


66 


30.6% 


11 



District Totals 



2 8 8 



62.3% 



149 



32.3% 



25 



4.3% 
8.1% 
7.5% 

6.7% 



4.9% 
5.9% 
5.1% 

5.4% 



117 
149 
120 

386 



41 
205 
216 

462 



262.6 
300.4 
341.1 

301.6 



411.5 
309.9 
293.3 

31 1.2 



181.0 
216.0 
311.5 

229.0 



406.0 
267.0 
250.0 

269.5 



92 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



<12 



12-24 



>24 



44 


56.4% 


26 


33.3% 


8 


10.3% 


31 


67.4% 


9 


19.6% 


6 


13.0% 


46 


80.7% 


9 


15.8% 


2 


3.5% 


49 


77.8% 


13 


20.6% 


1 


1.6% 


21 


58.3% 


10 


27.8% 


5 


13.9% 



Total 


Mean 


Median 


Pending 


Age (Days) 


Age (Days) 


78 


320.5 


313.5 


46 


323.6 


229.0 


57 


227.9 


193.0 


63 


256.1 


229.0 


36 


417.3 


249.5 



District Totals 191 
District 10 



Wake 



994 



68.2% 



67.9% 



67 



358 



23.9% 



24.5% 



22 



112 



7.9% 



7.7% 



280 



1,464 



300.1 



304.1 



237.5 



246.0 



District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 



District Totals 



97 


78.9% 


24 


19.5% 


2 


137 


73.3% 


48 


25.7% 


2 


55 


72.4% 


19 


25.0% 


2 



289 



74.9% 



91 



23.6% 



1.1% 
2.6% 

1.6% 



123 
187 

76 

386 



218.9 
239.0 
274.1 

239.5 



145.0 
162.0 
253.5 

169.5 



District 12 



Cumberland 
Hoke 


294 
15 


61.4% 
78.9% 


135 

1 


28.2% 
5.3% 


50 
3 


10.4% 
15.8% 


479 

19 


355.7 
382.6 


259.0 
252.0 


District Totals 


309 


62.0% 


136 


27.3% 


53 


10.6% 


498 


356.7 


258.5 


District 13 





















Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 

District Totals 



District 


14 


Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 



21 


95.5% 


1 


4.5% 





0.0% 


72 


57.1% 


40 


31.7% 


14 


11.1% 


84 


52.2% 


60 


37.3% 


17 


10.6% 


177 


57.3% 


101 


32.7% 


31 


10.0% 


376 


63.8% 


155 


26.3% 


58 


9.8% 



Chatham 
Orange 

District Totals 

District 16 



117 



26 
145 

171 



59.7% 



70.3% 
84.3% 

81.8% 



51 



11 
26 

37 



26.0% 



29.7% 
15.1% 

17.7% 



28 



14.3% 



0.0% 
0.6% 

0.5% 



Stokes 18 85.7% 

Surry 66 94.3% 

District Totals 84 92.3% 



14.3% 
5.7% 

7.7% 



0.0% 
0.0% 

0.0% 



22 
126 
161 

309 
589 

196 



37 
172 

209 



21 
70 

91 



145.5 
365.4 
389.9 

362.5 



344.3 



411.1 



238.2 
185.7 

195.0 



178.0 
157.8 

162.4 



106.5 
282.0 
343.0 

293.0 



242.0 



247.5 



250.0 
124.0 

138.0 



Robeson 


140 


78.2% 


35 


19.6% 


4 


2.2% 


179 


231.4 


167.0 


Scotland 


32 


74.4% 


10 


23.3% 


1 


2.3% 


43 


250.5 


166.0 


District Totals 


172 


77.5% 


45 


20.3% 


5 


2.3% 


222 


235.1 


166.5 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


9 


81.8% 


2 


18.2% 





0.0% 


11 


214.5 


204.0 


Rockingham 


73 


83.9% 


11 


12.6% 


3 


3.4% 


87. 


210.7 


152.0 


District Totals 


82 


83.7% 


13 


13.3% 


3 


3.1% 


98 


211.1 


173.5 


District 17B 





















119.0 
114.5 

117.0 



93 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



<i: 



12-24 



% 



>24 



% 



Total 
Pending 



Mean Median 

Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 18 



Guilford 


655 


79.21 


141 


17.0% 


31 


3.7% 


District 1 9A 














Cabarrus 


ion 


79. 4% 


24 


18.3% 


3 


2.3% 


Rowan 


127 


83.6% 


22 


14.5% 


3 


2.0% 


District Totals 


231 


81.65 


46 


16.3% 


6 


2.1% 


District 19B 














Montgomery 


13 


81.35 


3 


18.8% 





0.0% 


Randolph 


70 


76. 1% 


19 


20.7% 


3 


3.3% 


District Totals 


83 


76.91 


22 


20.4% 


3 


2.8% 


District 20 














Anson 


47 


70.1% 


16 


23.9% 


4 


6.0% 


Moore 


b2 


62.0% 


25 


25.0% 


13 


13.0% 


Richmond 


57 


62.0% 


28 


30.4% 


7 


7.6% 


Stanly 


47 


59.5% 


15 


19.0% 


17 


21.5% 


Union 


110 


69.6% 


38 


24.1% 


10 


6.3% 


District Totals 


323 


65.1% 


122 


24.6% 


51 


10.3% 


District 21 














Forsyth 


462 


88.7% 


57 


10.9% 


2 


0.4% 


District 22 















Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 

District Totals 



27 


81.8% 


6 


18.2% 





107 


84.3% 


15 


11.8% 


5 


20 


74.1% 


6 


22.2% 


1 


132 


82.5% 


22 


13.8% 


6 



286 



82.4% 



49 



14.1% 



12 



0.0% 
3.9% 
3.7% 
3.8% 

3.5% 



827 



131 
152 

283 



16 
92 

108 



67 

100 

92 

79 

158 

496 



521 



33 

127 

27 

160 

347 



245.7 



206.1 
229.0 

218.4 



196.6 
259.5 

250.2 



298.7 
360.0 
337.2 
546.3 
305.1 

359.7 



192.0 



209.9 
216.6 
255.2 
231.1 

225.6 



182.0 



144.0 
199.0 

182.0 



133.0 
229.5 

219.5 



242.0 
282.0 
295.0 
292.0 
239.0 

258.0 



161.0 



201.0 
175.0 
250.0 
182.0 

182.0 



District 23 



Alleghany 




10 


76.9% 


3 


23.1% 





0.0% 


13 


219.9 


98.0 


Ashe 




12 


92.3% 


1 


7.7% 





0.0% 


13 


174.8 


151.0 


Wilkes 




58 


78.4% 


24 


19.2% 


3 


2.4% 


125 


239.3 


211.0 


Yadkin 




31 


77.5% 


7 


17.5% 


2 


5.0% 


40 


234.0 


179.5 


District 


Totals 


151 


79.1% 


35 


18.3% 


5 


2.6% 


191 


232.5 


189.0 


District 24 






















Avery 




33 


63.5% 


18 


34.6% 


1 


1.9% 


52 


275.2 


210.0 


Madison 




28 


37.8% 


30 


40.5% 


16 


21.6% 


74 


475.7 


490.5 


"it-inell 




11 


50.0% 


10 


45.5% 


1 


4.5% 


22 


359.5 


371.0 


Watauga 




82 


87.2% 


n 


11.7% 


1 


1.1% 


94 


218.2 


202.0 


Yar.cey 




19 


73.1% 


7 


26.9% 





0.0% 


26 


256.4 


231.5 


District 


Totals 


173 


64.6% 


76 


28.4% 


19 


7.1% 


268 


315.7 


251.0 


District 25 






















'-, .>■ ■"-. 




ii 1 


77.6% 


28 


19.6% 


4 


2.8% 


143 


236.8 


161.0 


Caldwell 




124 


71.3% 


40 


23.0% 


10 


5.7% 


174 


298.3 


253.0 


Catawba 




'80 


83.3% 


35 


15.8% 


2 


0.9% 


222 


217.2 


194.5 


District 


Totals 


420 


77.9% 


103 


19.1% 


16 


3.0% 


539 


248.6 


201.0 


District 26 























Mecklenburg 



1,574 



67 . 2% 



620 



26.5% 



149 



6.4% 



2,343 



307.6 



230.0 



94 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



Total Mean Median 



<12 % 12-24 % >24 % Pending Age (Days) Age (Days) 

District 27A 

Gaston 336 87. 0% 41 10.6? 9 2.31 386 199.4 160.0 

District 27B 



Cleveland 


93 


81.6% 


20 


17.5% 


1 


0.9% 


114 


228.1 


189.0 


Lincoln 


43 


78. 2% 


11 


20.0% 


1 


1.8% 


55 


250.7 


217.0 


District Totals 


136 


80.5% 


31 


18.3% 


2 


1.2% 


169 


235.5 


196.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


280 


83.3% 


43 


12.8% 


13 


3.9% 


336 


222.1 


165.0 


District 29 




















Henderson 


98 


67.H 


33 


22.6% 


15 


10.3% 


146 


327.1 


244.5 


McDowell 


36 


56.3% 


22 


34.4% 


6 


9.4% 


64 


348.9 


308.5 


Polk 


8 


66.7% 


2 


16.7% 


2 


16.7% 


12 


389.8 


220.0 


Rutherford 


45 


52.9% 


25 


29.4% 


15 


17.6% 


85 


385.9 


328.0 


Transylvania 


40 


56.3% 


22 


31.0% 


9 


12.7% 


71 


376.4 


347.0 


District Totals 


227 


60.1% 


104 


27.5% 


47 


12.4% 


378 


355.3 


292.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


18 


58.1% 


7 


22.6% 


6 


19.4% 


31 


438.6 


328.0 


Clay 


6 


54.5% 


4 


36.4% 


1 


9.1% 


11 


399.8 


362.0 


Graham 


13 


54.2% 


8 


33.3% 


3 


12.5% 


24 


401.3 


317.0 


Haywood 


57 


50.4% 


46 


40.7% 


10 


8.8% 


113 


410.0 


362.0 


Jackson 


31 


63.3% 


11 


22.4% 


7 


14.3% 


49 


404.2 


232.0 


Macon 


43 


52.4% 


17 


20.7% 


22 


26.8% 


82 


492.0 


332.0 


Swain 


16 


64.0% 


5 


20.0% 


4 


16.0% 


25 


409.0 


301.0 


District Totals 


184 


54.9% 


98 


29.3% 


53 


15.8% 


335 


430.8 


316.0 


State Totals 10 


,577 


70.0% 


3,477 


23.0% 


1,049 


6.9% 


15,103 


298.7 


224.0 



95 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



<12 



% 



12-24 



>24 



% 



Total 
Disposed 



Mean 
Age (Days) 



Median 
Age (Days) 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 



4 


57.1? 


2 


28.6? 


1 


19 


63.3% 


6 


20.0% 


5 


13 


48.1? 


11 


40.7? 


3 


5d 


55.4% 


28 


27.7? 


17 


6 


54.5? 


1 


9.1% 


4 


35 


62.5? 


17 


30.4% 


4 


11 


57.9? 


5 


26.3% 


3 



14.3% 
16.7% 
11.1% 
16.8% 



36. 

7, 



4% 
1% 



144 



57.4% 



70 



27.9% 



37 



15.8% 



14.7? 



7 

30 
27 

101 
11 
56 
19 

251 



338.4 


239.0 


399.4 


242.0 


415.8 


385.0 


412.2 


330.0 


420.3 


91.0 


330.8 


243.5 


381.8 


244.0 



388.9 



300.0 



District 


2 




















Beaufort 




48 


62.3? 


22 


28.6% 


7 


9.1? 


77 


369.1 


268.0 


Hyde 




5 


83.3? 


1 


16.7% 





0.0% 


6 


187.0 


138.5 


Martin 




17 


56.7? 


8 


26.7% 


5 


16.7% 


30 


427.8 


259.5 


Tyrrell 




6 


60.0% 


2 


20.0? 


2 


20.0% 


10 


381.4 


196.0 


Washington 


14 


48.3% 


9 


31.0? 


6 


20.7% 


29 


460.9 


371.0 



District Totals 



90 



59.2% 



42 



27.6% 



20 



13.2% 



152 



391.8 



269.0 



District 3 




















Carteret 


97 


63.0% 


44 


28.6% 


13 


8.4% 


154 


325.0 


267.0 


Craven 


127 


64.5% 


56 


28.4% 


14 


7.1% 


197 


310.0 


235.0 


Pamlico 


10 


83.3% 


2 


16.7% 





0.0% 


12 


214.7 


175.0 


Pitt 


218 


68.3% 


80 


25.1% 


21 


6.6% 


319 


285.3 


238.0 


District Totals 


452 


66.3% 


182 


26.7% 


48 


7.0% 


682 


300.2 


249.0 


District 4 




















Duplin 


36 


50.7% 


23 


32.4% 


12 


16.9% 


71 


449.0 


354.0 


Jones 


11 


52.4% 


4 


19.0% 


6 


28.6% 


21 


498.5 


353.0 


Onslow 


107 


52.7% 


68 


33.5% 


28 


13.8% 


203 


395.8 


350.0 


Sampson 


54 


65.9% 


23 


28.0% 


5 


6.1% 


82 


297.6 


215.0 


District Totals 


208 


55.2% 


118 


31.3% 


51 


13.5% 


377 


390.2 


327.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


216 


59.5% 


99 


27.3% 


48 


13.2% 


363 


357.1 


292.0 


Pender 


13 


41.9% 


12 


38.7% 


6 


19.4% 


31 


521.5 


386.0 


District Totals 


229 


58.1% 


11 1 


28.2% 


54 


13.7% 


394 


370.1 


303.5 


District 6 




















3ertie 


25 


75.8% 


6 


18.2% 


2 


6.1% 


33 


248.9 


226.0 


Halifax 


41 


51.3% 


27 


33.8% 


12 


15.0% 


80 


475.9 


353.0 


Hertford 


29 


52.7% 


16 


29.1% 


10 


18.2% 


55 


429.9 


353.0 


Northampton 


15 


60.0% 


6 


24.0% 


4 


16.0% 


25 


389.2 


253.0 


District Totals 


110 


57.0% 


55 


28.5% 


28 


14.5% 


193 


412.7 


275.0 


District 7 




















Edgecombe 


79 


73.8% 


23 


21.5% 


5 


4.7% 


107 


268.4 


215.0 


Na3h 


117 


68.8? 


36 


21.2% 


17 


10.0% 


170 


320.7 


252.0 


« . . - o n 


74 


62.2% 


i'\ 


28.6% 


11 


9.2% 


119 


350.2 


242.0 


District Totals 


270 


68.2% 


93 


23.5% 


33 


8.3? 


396 


315.4 


236.0 


District 8 




















Greene 


18 


72.0% 


6 


24.0% 


1 


4.0% 


25 


248.5 


175.0 


L '■. r, ', . r 


118 


62.1% 


52 


27.4% 


20 


10.5% 


190 


323.6 


256.5 


"'-./'. ': 


125 


60.4% 


50 


24.2% 


32 


15.5% 


207 


377.2 


286.0 



District Totals 



261 



61.8% 



108 



25.6% 



53 



12.6% 



422 



345.4 



261.5 



96 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



.12 



12-24 



>24 



% 



Total 
Disposed 



Mean 
Age (Days) 



Median 
Age (Days) 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 

District Totals 

District 10 
Wake 



25 


65.8% 


5 


13.2% 


8 


30 


53. 6% 


18 


32.1% 


8 


23 


59.0% 


11 


28.2% 


5 


28 


53.8% 


17 


32.7% 


7 


18 


54.5% 


11 


33.3% 


4 



124 



797 



56.9% 



63.2% 



62 



355 



28.4% 



32 



28.2% 109 



21.1% 
14.3% 
12.8% 
13.5% 
12.1% 

14.7% 



8.6% 



38 
56 
39 
52 
33 

218 



1261 



368.9 



388, 
344, 
399, 
386, 



379.6 



324.0 



215.5 
301.5 
280.0 
335.5 
333.0 

301.5 



260.0 



District 11 

Harnett 69 59.0% 43 36.8% 5 4.3% 117 

Johnston 130 68.4% 49 25.8% 11 5.8% 190 

Lee 66 66.0% 33 33.0% 1 1.0% 100 

District Totals 265 65.1% 125 30.7% 17 4.2% 407 

District 12 



Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 

District Totals 

District 14 
Durham 



30 
38 
50 

118 



343 



58.8% 
55.9% 
43.5% 

50.4% 
65.6% 



20 
25 
33 

78 



141 



39.2% 
36.8% 
28.7% 

33.3% 
27.0% 



1 
5 

32 

38 



39 



2.0% 

7.4% 

27.8% 

16.2% 



7.5% 



51 

68 

115 

234 
523 



311.6 


293.0 


284.3 


191.5 


305.7 


303.0 



297.4 



402.7 



317.9 



243.0 



Cumberland 


186 


43.1% 


150 


34.7% 


96 


22.2% 


432 


484.8 


419.0 


Hoke 


10 


66.7% 


2 


13.3% 


3 


20.0% 


15 


405.7 


272.0 


District Totals 


196 


43.8% 


152 


34.0% 


99 


22.1% 


447 


482.1 


413.0 


District 13 





















295.0 


290.0 


349.6 


293.0 


481.8 


477.0 



362.0 



253.0 



District 15A 
Alamance 



82 



52.6% 



31 



19.9% 



43 



27.6% 



156 



535.1 



337.5 



District 15B 



Chatham 


30 


73.2% 


11 


26.8% 





0.0% 


41 


296.3 


289.0 


Orange 


111 


68.1% 


46 


28.2% 


6 


3.7% 


163 


306.2 


302.0 


District Totals 


141 


69.1% 


57 


27.9% 


6 


2.9% 


204 


304.3 


298.0 


District 16 




















Robeson 


109 


50.0% 


82 


37.6% 


27 


12.4% 


218 


418.5 


364.5 


Scotland 


33 


48.5% 


24 


35.3% 


11 


16.2% 


68 


390.6 


375.0 


District Totals 


142 


49.7% 


106 


37.1% 


38 


13.3% 


286 


411.9 


368.5 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


6 


42.9% 


6 


42.9% 


2 


14.3% 


14 


404.9 


398.0 


Rockingham 


95 


71.4% 


38 


28.6% 





0.0% 


133 


250.0 


253.0 


District Totals 


101 


68.7% 


44 


29.9% 


2 


1.4% 


147 


264.8 


256.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


20 


74.1% 


7 


25.9% 





0.0% 


27 


258.6 


288.0 


Surry 


83 


84.7% 


14 


14.3% 


1 


1.0% 


98 


234.6 


235.5 



District Totals 



103 



82.4% 



21 



16.8% 



0.8% 



125 



239.8 



240.0 



97 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 



:12 



Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



12-24 



>24 



Total Mean Median 

Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 18 




















Guilford 


628 


54.8% 


430 


37.5% 


88 


7.7% 


1,146 


356.0 


340.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


94 


64.4% 


47 


32.2% 


5 


3.4% 


146 


300.6 


256.0 


Rowan 


89 


59.7% 


55 


36 . 9% 


5 


3.4% 


149 


309.2 


301.0 



District Totals 183 
District 19B 



62.0% 



102 



34.6% 



10 



3.4% 



295 



304.9 



284.0 



Montgomery 


12 


44 . 4% 


11 


40.7% 


4 


14.8% 


27 


434.0 


369.0 


Randolph 


64 


52.9% 


40 


33.1% 


17 


14.0% 


121 


410.1 


329.0 


District Totals 


76 


51.4% 


51 


34.5% 


21 


14.2% 


148 


414.5 


343.5 


District 20 




















Anson 


22 


44.0% 


23 


46.0% 


5 


10.0% 


50 


390.6 


382.0 


Moore 


46 


31.9% 


35 


24.3% 


63 


43.8% 


144 


592.1 


581.0 


Richmond 


45 


52.3% 


24 


27.9% 


17 


19.8% 


86 


476.4 


347.5 


Stanly 


25 


50.0% 


21 


42.0% 


4 


8.0% 


50 


364.4 


367.0 


Union 


67 


47.5% 


54 


38.3% 


20 


14.2% 


141 


419.7 


397.0 


District Totals 


205 


43.5% 


157 


33.3% 


109 


23.1% 


471 


473.8 


413.0 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


479 


72.1% 


167 


25.2% 


18 


2.7% 


664 


268.0 


24?. 5 


District 22 




















Alexander 


16 


51.6% 


15 


48.4% 





0.0% 


31 


354.4 


333.0 


Davidson 


102 


61.8% 


57 


34.5% 


6 


3.6% 


165 


314.7 


300.0 


Davie 


31 


77.5% 


8 


20.0% 


1 


2.5% 


40 


258.2 


254.0 


Iredell 


136 


66.0% 


62 


30.1% 


8 


3.9% 


206 


270.8 


276.0 


District Totals 


285 


64.5% 


142 


32.1% 


15 


3.4% 


442 


291.9 


285.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


9 


90 . 0% 


1 


10.0% 





0.0% 


10 


146.8 


166.0 


Ashe 


1 1 


50.0% 


1 1 


50.0% 





0.0% 


22 


363.2 


348.0 


Wilkes 


88 


54.7% 


67 


41.6% 


6 


3.7% 


161 


337.2 


350.0 


Yadkin 


24 


70.6% 


7 


20.6% 


3 


8.8% 


34 


296.0 


242.0 


District Totals 


132 


58.1% 


86 


37.9% 


9 


4.0% 


227 


325.2 


326.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


19 


52.8% 


15 


41.7% 


2 


5.6% 


36 


325.5 


294.0 


Madison 


] 1 


19.3% 


14 


24.6% 


32 


56.1% 


57 


698.4 


766.0 


Mitchell 


16 


57.1% 


10 


35.7% 


2 


7.1% 


28 


305.7 


332.5 


Watauga 


4 2 


61.8% 


24 


35.3% 


2 


2.9% 


68 


317.7 


286.5 


Yancey 


5 


41.7% 


6 


50 . 0% 


1 


8.3% 


12 


385.4 


408.0 


District Totals 


93 


46.3% 


69 


34 . 3% 


39 


19.4% 


201 


429.4 


394.0 


District 25 




















Eurke 


109 


61.2% 


57 


32.0% 


12 


6.7% 


178 


325.7 


312.5 


Caldwell 


107 


61.5% 


52 


29 . 9% 


15 


8.6% 


174 


356.0 


328.0 


Catawba 


202 


62 . 9% 


95 


29.6% 


24 


7.5% 


321 


339.4 


304.0 


District Totals 


418 


62.1% 


204 


30.3% 


51 


7.6% 


673 


340.1 


312.0 


District 26 





















Mecklenburg 1,113 



51.8% 



843 



39.2% 



194 



9.0% 



2,150 



377.9 



343.5 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



<12 



12-24 



% 



>24 



% 



Total 
Disposed 



Mean Median 

Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 27A 
Gaston 



396 



79.2% 



92 



18.4% 



12 



2.4% 



500 



251.4 



255.5 



District 27B 



Cleveland 


102 


64.6% 


48 


30.4% 


8 


5.1% 


158 


317.0 


324.0 


Lincoln 


34 


59.6% 


20 


35.1% 


3 


5.3% 


57 


302.8 


273.0 


District Totals 


136 


63.3% 


68 


31.6% 


11 


5.1% 


215 


313.2 


318.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


383 


71.2% 


133 


24.7% 


22 


4.1% 


538 


307.2 


253.5 


District 29 




















Henderson 


51 


38.1% 


53 


39.6% 


30 


22.4% 


134 


500.5 


468.0 


McDowell 


11 


26.2% 


25 


59.5% 


6 


14.3% 


42 


503.9 


576.5 


Polk 


12 


46.2% 


11 


42.3% 


3 


11.5% 


26 


426.5 


368.0 


Rutherford 


26 


35.6% 


21 


28.8% 


26 


35.6% 


73 


518.7 


595.0 


Transylvania 


17 


34.7% 


20 


40.8% 


12 


24.5% 


49 


513.6 


561.0 


District Totals 


117 


36.1% 


130 


40.1% 


77 


23.8% 


324 


501.1 


520.5 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


17 


53.1% 


9 


28.1% 


6 


18.8% 


32 


428.9 


359.0 


Clay 


5 


62.5% 


2 


25.0% 


1 


12.5% 


8 


366.0 


291.5 


Graham 


9 


42.9% 


5 


23.8% 


7 


33.3% 


21 


550.1 


476.0 


Haywood 


38 


35.2% 


43 


39.8% 


27 


25.0% 


108 


523.6 


511.0 


Jackson 


17 


33.3% 


21 


41.2% 


13 


25.5% 


51 


560.5 


481.0 


Macon 


20 


40.8% 


19 


38.8% 


10 


20.4% 


49 


537.4 


474.0 


Swain 


19 


55.9% 


3 


8.8% 


12 


35.3% 


34 


497.4 


240.0 


District Totals 


125 


41.3% 


102 


33.7% 


76 


25.1% 


303 


516.8 


474.0 


State Totals 


8,945 


59.0% 


4,727 


31.2% 1 


,500 


9.9% 


15,172 


355.5 


299.0 



99 



CASELOAD TRENDS IN ESTATES AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS 

1977 _ 1986-87 

ESTATE CASES 



i 

H 
O 

u 

s 

A 
N 
D 

S 

O 

F 

C 

■\ 

s 

F 
S 



45 



4D 



35 



30 



25 



20 



15 



10 




77 78 



78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 



SPECIAL PROCEEDING CASES 



r 

H 
O 

r 
S 
A 
\ 
D 
S 


F 

< 

A 
S 
E 

S 




77 78 



78-79 



79-80 80-81 



81-82 82-83 



83-84 



84-85 85-86 86-87 



Following the general trend of the last decade, filings of 
estate and special proceedings increased. During 1986-87, 
estate filings increased by 4.1%and estate dispositions by 



5.8%; special proceeding filings increased by 1 1.4% while 
dispositions of these cases increased by 1.8%. 



100 



Filed 


Disposed 


45 


50 


218 


168 


119 


95 


200 


182 


66 


42 


280 


311 


103 


96 



451 


264 


93 


79 


192 


183 


32 


19 


102 


108 



440 


392 


424 


445 


82 


127 


604 


540 



361 


365 


79 


57 


434 


375 


444 


434 



189 


134 


435 


412 


211 


189 


192 


193 



470 


388 


462 


481 


487 


503 



112 


146 


475 


463 


690 


677 



Filed 


Disposed 


17 


12 


66 


47 


59 


47 


142 


109 


22 


9 


176 


105 


47 


30 



271 


90 


43 


33 


109 


136 


17 


12 


70 


39 



257 


157 


457 


409 


15 


31 


656 


396 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Estates Special Proceedings 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 1,031 944 529 359 

District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 870 653 510 310 

District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 

District Totals 1,550 1,504 1,385 993 

District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 

District Totals 1,318 1,231 1,712 1,226 

District 5 

New Hanover 756 693 11 15 1053 

Pender 179 197 145 125 

District Totals 935 890 1,260 1,178 

District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 

District Totals 1,027 928 593 496 

District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 

District Totals 1,419 1,372 1,048 957 

District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 

District Totals 1,277 1,286 1,221 1,213 



101 



260 


211 


47 


25 


1034 


654 


371 


336 



95 


57 


266 


186 


124 


123 


108 


130 



299 


107 


380 


277 


369 


573 



32 


24 


391 


370 


798 


819 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 



Special Proceedings 
Filed Disposed Fil 

District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 

District Totals 1,266 1,105 951 867 

District 10 

Wake 1,741 2,171 2,443 2,450 

District 11 

Harnett 409 408 337 304 

Johnston 681 647 664 621 



Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 



July 1, 1986 


— June 30, 




Estates 


Filed 


Disposed 


244 


131 


260 


269 


240 


225 


299 


277 


223 


203 



409 


408 


681 


647 


301 


313 



206 


245 


413 


388 


384 


393 


1,003 


1,026 


1,162 


1,114 



Filed 


Disposed 


238 


183 


310 


319 


129 


106 


185 


179 


89 


80 



Lee 301 313 220 273 

District Totals 1,391 1,368 1,221 1,198 

District 12 



244 


238 


260 


255 


322 


213 



Cumberland 1,026 1,123 1,912 1,856 

Hoke 75 92 74 60 

District Totals 1,101 1,215 1,986 1,916 

District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 

District Totals 1,003 1,026 826 706 

District 14 

1,329 1,269 



763 686 664 570 



Chatham 298 314 174 224 

Orange 458 448 578 446 

District Totals 756 762 752 670 

District 16 

Robeson 613 510 736 629 

Scotland 258 245 328 206 

District Totals 871 755 1,064 835 

District 17A 

Caswell 145 136 144 112 

Rockingham 641 638 330 273 

District Total3 786 774 474 385 

District 17B 

Stoke3 232 250 118 96 

Curry 465 449 338 323 

District Total3 697 699 456 419 



1 02 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 



July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Estates 



Filed 



Disposed 



Special Proceedings 



Filed 



Disposed 



District 18 
Guilford 



2,218 



2,233 



2,415 



2,244 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 

District Totals 

District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 

District Totals 

District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 

District Totals 



District 


21 


Forsyth 




District 


22 



Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell. 

District Totals 

District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 

District Totals 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 

District Totals 

District 26 
Mecklenburg 



690 
933 

1,623 



178 
621 

799 



1,837 



1,778 



1,910 



866 



589 



639 
910 

1,549 



164 
634 



142 


110 


505 


424 


295 


229 


430 


412 


465 


376 



1,551 



1,670 



152 


164 


821 


766 


195 


174 


742 


773 



1,877 



107 


97 


215 


229 


314 


301 


230 


254 



103 


107 


91 


114 


107 


70 


194 


172 


94 


92 



555 



439 
490 
694 


486 
493 
655 


1,623 


1,634 


2,734 


2,756 



331 
970 

1,301 



146 
393 

539 



1,105 



1,464 



1,073 



662 



482 



243 
834 

1,077 



89 
391 



113 


96 


316 


265 


247 


180 


146 


94 


283 


230 



865 



1,413 



87 


60 


478 


191 


136 


62 


372 


346 



659 



61 


52 


115 


52 


414 


238 


12 


60 



402 



122 


153 


63 


68 


44 


19 


199 


159 


54 


39 



438 



454 
384 
455 


342 
408 
379 


1,293 


1,129 


3,818 


1,940 



103 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 



District 27A 
Gaston 



District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 



District Totals 

District 28 
Buncombe 



District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 

District Totals 



July 1, 1986 


— June 30, 


1987 








Estates 




Special 
Filed 


Proceedings 


Filed 


Disposed 


Disposed 


1,131 


1,210 




643 


596 


562 
327 


530 
283 




559 
232 


494 
183 


889 


813 




791 


677 


1,442 


1,422 




1,422 


1,029 


659 
263 
203 
499 
183 


653 
260 
164 
453 
156 




343 
213 
78 
213 
139 


321 
64 

39 

188 

96 



1,807 



1,686 



986 



708 



District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 

District Totals 

State Totals 



172 


137 


39 


39 


39 


33 


417 


421 


149 


89 


196 


170 


63 


63 


075 


952 


285 


42,070 



162 


128 


32 


25 


28 


20 


239 


194 


109 


50 


257 


198 


41 


20 



39,286 



635 



32,309 



1 04 



CASELOAD TRENDS OF CRIMINAL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS 

1977 _ 1986-87 



r 

H 

O 

U 

s 

A 
N 
D 
S 


F 

C 

A 
S 
E 

S 



90 



80 



70 



60 



50 



40 



30 



20 



10 





Filings 



Dispositions 



End Pending 



77 78 



78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 



The number of criminal cases filed in the superior court 
continued to grow in 1986-87 largely due to a 13.8% 



increase in felony filings compared to 1985-86. Misde- 
meanor filings increased by 3.4%. 



105 



FILINGS OF CRIMINAL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS — BY TYPE OF CASE 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



A total oi S3. 4^8 criminal cases were reported filed in the Superior Courts, of which 51,210 were felonies, and 32,268 
misdemeanors. These are broken down into the following specific types of cases: 

FELONIES 

Murder 

Manslaughter 

First Degree Rape 

Other Sex Offenses 

Robbery 

Assault 

Burglary 

Larceny 

Arson & Burnings 

Forgery & Utterings 

Fraudulent Activity 

Controlled Substances 

Other* 

TOTAL 



tnber Filed 


% of Total Filings 


545 


1.1% 


113 


0.2% 


1,252 


2.4% 


291 


0.6% 


1,780 


3.5% 


2,065 


4.0% 


8,995 


17.6% 


6,076 


11.9% 


358 


0.7% 


7,032 


13.7% 


5,733 


11.2% 


10,191 


19.9% 


6,779 


13.2% 


51,210 


100.0% 



MISDEMEANORS 

DWI Appeal 

Other Motor Vehicle Appeal 
Non-Motor Vehicle Appeal 
Misdemeanor Originating in Superior Court 
TOTAL 



6,193 
6,036 

16,941 
3,098 

32,268 



19.2% 
18.7% 
52.5% 

9.6% 
100.0% 



""Other" felony cases include a wide variety of offenses 
that do not fit squarely into any of the listed offenses 
above, including kidnapping, trespassing, crimes against 
public morality, perjury, and obstructing justice. When 



more than one offense is charged, the first offense listed 
in the criminal pleading (originating document) is used 
to assign the case type given above. 



106 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



Begin 
Pending 
7/1/86 



6 
10 
12 
81 
11 
71 



District Totals 199 

District 2 

Beaufort 160 

Hyde 29 

Martin 13 

Tyrrell 17 

Washington 11 

District Totals 230 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 

District Totals 

District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 

District Totals 

District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 

District Totals 

District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 



71 
127 

19 
147 

364 



50 

2 

183 

30 

265 



349 
27 

376 



14 

122 

20 

57 



District Totals 213 

District 7 

Edgecombe 53 

Nash 112 

Wilson 50 

District Totals 215 

District 8 

Greene 30 

Lenoir 59 

Wayne 189 

District Totals 278 



July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Felonies 



End 
Total % Caseload Pending 

Filed Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/87 



18 
95 
42 

281 
39 

203 
33 

711 



490 

43 

153 

27 
72 



186 

477 

67 

1,395 



472 

115 

1,405 

366 



715 



346 
715 

460 



24 
105 

54 
362 

50 
274 

41 

910 



650 

72 

166 

44 
83 



785 1,015 



257 

604 

86 

1,542 



2,125 2,4{ 



522 

117 

1,588 

396 



2,358 2,623 



928 



399 
827 
510 



1,521 1,736 



17 
74 
39 

286 
33 

200 
31 

680 



544 
56 

130 
29 
63 

822 



208 

458 

65 

1,169 

1,900 



505 

59 

1,328 

386 

2,278 



2,054 2,403 1,983 

857 884 673 

2,911 3,287 2,656 



747 



288 
708 
346 

1,342 



70.8% 
70.5% 
72.2% 
79.0% 
66.0% 
73.0% 
75.6% 

74.7% 



83.7% 
77.8% 
78.3% 
65.9% 
75.9% 

81.0% 



80.9% 
75.8% 
75.6% 
75.8% 

76.3% 



96.7% 
50.4% 
83.6% 
97.5% 



82.5% 
76.1% 

80.8% 



80.5% 



72.2% 
85.6% 
67.8% 

77.3% 



7 
31 
15 

76 
17 
74 
10 

230 



106 
16 
36 
15 
20 

193 



49 
146 

21 
373 

589 



17 

58 

260 

10 

345 



420 
211 

631 



147 


161 


101 


62.7% 


60 


279 


401 


335 


83.5% 


66 


204 


224 


192 


85.7% 


32 


85 


142 


119 


83.8% 


23 



181 



111 
119 
164 

394 



71 


101 


84 


83.2% 


17 


341 


400 


322 


80.5% 


78 


524 


713 


552 


77.4% 


161 



21 
22 

13 
81 
42 
127 
40 

351 



75 

15 

21 

9 

20 

140 



56 



194 



936 1,214 



958 



78.9% 



256 



136 



31 
106 
139 

276 



Misdemeanors 



Begin 

Pending Total 

7/1/86 Filed Caseload Disposed 



43 
197 
130 
362 

70 
629 
131 



64 
219 
148 
443 
112 
756 
171 



1,562 1,913 



305 
23 
94 
25 
66 

513 



380 
38 

115 
34 



653 



46 

190 
89 

333 
90 

633 

131 

1,512 



275 

36 
80 
27 
65 

483 



% Caseload 
Disposed 



71.9% 
86.8% 
60.1% 
75.2% 
80.4% 
83.7% 
76.6% 



461 



517 



469 



558 



752 



654 



631 



767 



72 103 

453 559 

799 938 

1,324 1,600 



608 



91 

463 
759 

1,313 



End 
Pending 

6/30/87 



18 
29 
59 

110 
22 

123 
40 



79.0% 



72.4% 
94.7% 
69.6% 
79.4% 
75.6% 

74.0% 



90.7% 



87.0% 



79.3% 



88.3% 
82.8% 
80.9% 

82.1% 



401 



105 
2 

35 
7 

21 

170 



87 


99 


186 


174 


93.5% 


12 


48 


415 


463 


398 


86.0% 


65 


6 


21 


27 


24 


88.9% 


3 


137 


1,310 


1,447 


1,133 


78.3% 


314 


278 


1,845 


2,123 


1,729 


81.4% 


394 


12 


56 


68 


56 


82.4% 


12 


1 


12 


13 


9 


69.2% 


4 


42 


327 


369 


337 


91.3% 


32 


1 


66 


67 


67 


100.0% 






48 



166 


811 


977 


851 


87.1% 


126 


14 


72 


86 


56 


65.1% 


30 


180 


883 


1,063 


907 


85.3% 


156 


28 


70 


98 


85 


86.7% 


13 


116 


296 


412 


366 


88.8% 


46 


31 


120 


151 


121 


80.1% 


30 


19 


72 


91 


82 


90.1% 


9 



98 



29 


223 


252 


178 


70.6% 


74 


32 


229 


261 


223 


85.4% 


38 


75 


179 


254 


207 


81.5% 


47 



159 



12 

96 

179 

287 



107 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Fel 


onies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/86 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


7/1/86 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


District 9 


























Franklin 


40 


198 


238 


153 


64. 3 J 


85 


45 


134 


179 


116 


64.8% 


63 


Granville 


92 


241 


333 


284 


85.3% 


49 


106 


169 


275 


234 


85.1% 


41 


Person 


34 


215 


249 


166 


66.7% 


83 


86 


172 


258 


181 


70.2% 


77 


Vance 


130 


354 


484 


352 


72.7% 


132 


122 


303 


425 


322 


75.8% 


103 


Warren 


38 


82 


120 


85 


70.8% 


35 


31 


120 


151 


114 


75.5% 


37 


District Totals 


334 


1,090 


1,424 


1,040 


73.0% 


384 


390 


898 


1,288 


967 


75.1% 


321 


District 10 


























Wake 


2,080 


3,658 


5,738 


3,836 


66.9% 


1,902 


438 


1,722 


2,160 


1,625 


75.2% 


535 


District 11 


























Harnett 


63 


283 


346 


295 


85.3% 


51 


10 


95 


105 


92 


87.6% 


13 


Johnston 


69 


268 


337 


276 


81.9% 


61 


16 


248 


264 


237 


89.8% 


27 


Lee 


97 


385 


482 


459 


95.2% 


23 


48 


199 


247 


240 


97.2% 


7 


District Totals 


229 


936 


1,165 


1,030 


88.4% 


135 


74 


542 


616 


569 


92.4% 


47 


District 12 


























Cumberland 


510 


1,469 


1,979 


1,356 


68.5% 


623 


81 


357 


438 


376 


85.8% 


62 


Hoke 


27 


133 


160 


124 


77.5% 


36 


15 


37 


52 


38 


73.1% 


14 


District Totals 


537 


1,602 


2,139 


1,480 


69.2% 


659 


96 


394 


490 


414 


84.5% 


76 


District 13 


























Bladen 


157 


66 


223 


181 


81.2% 


42 


51 


106 


157 


126 


80.3% 


31 


Brunswick 


177 


526 


703 


361 


51.4% 


342 


68 


117 


185 


146 


78.9% 


39 


Columbus 


101 


223 


324 


212 


65.4% 


112 


66 


312 


378 


271 


71.7% 


107 


District Totals 


435 


815 


1,250 


754 


60.3% 


496 


185 


535 


720 


543 


75.4% 


177 


District 14 


























Durham 


470 


1,836 


2,306 


1,541 


66.8% 


765 


209 


363 


572 


312 


54.5% 


260 


District 1 5A 


























Alamance 


453 


999 


1,452 


1,141 


78.6% 


311 


228 


634 


862 


707 


82.0% 


155 


District 15B 


























Chatham 


32 


157 


189 


124 


65.6% 


65 


22 


93 


115 


69 


60.0% 


46 


Orange 


103 


546 


649 


462 


71.2% 


187 


21 


78 


99 


69 


69.7% 


30 


District Totals 


135 


703 


838 


586 


69.9% 


252 


43 


171 


214 


138 


64.5% 


76 


District 16 


























- o z e 3 -, r, 


320 


1,220 


1,540 


1,192 


77.4% 


348 


232 


764 


996 


799 


80.2% 


197 


Ccctlar.d 


119 


430 


549 


390 


71.0% 


159 


220 


248 


468 


318 


67.9% 


150 


District Totals 


439 


1,650 


2,089 


1,582 


75.7% 


507 


452 


1,012 


1,464 


1,117 


76.3% 


347 


District 17A 


























Ca3well 


4 


88 


92 


84 


91.3% 


8 


13 


192 


205 


160 


78.0% 


45 


Po'.c i r.gnan 


117 


1,052 


1,169 


813 


69.5% 


356 


97 


827 


924 


691 


74.8% 


233 


District Totals 


121 


1,140 


1,261 


897 


71.1% 


364 


110 


1,019 


1,129 


851 


75.4% 


278 


District 17B 


























Cto/e3 


49 


274 


323 


270 


83.6% 


53 


31 


199 


230 


199 


86.5% 


31 




47 


544 


591 


548 


92.7% 


43 


76 


591 


667 


580 


87.0% 


87 



District Totals 



ii 



>A>, 



914 



l. 5% 



96 



107 



790 



897 



779 



86.8% 



118 



!08 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Fel 


onies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/86 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


7/1/86 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


District 18 


























Guilford 


1,769 


3,929 


5,698 


3,826 


67.1% 


1,872 


304 


939 


1,243 


953 


76.7% 


290 


District 19A 


























Cabarrus 


299 


1,054 


1,353 


957 


70. 7% 


396 


283 


575 


858 


593 


69.1% 


265 


Rowan 


126 


914 


1,040 


749 


72.01 


291 


135 


594 


729 


540 


74.1% 


189 


District Totals 


425 


1,968 


2,393 


1,706 


71.3% 


687 


418 


1,169 


1,587 


1,133 


71.4% 


454 


District 19B 


























Montgomery 


382 


192 


574 


503 


87.6% 


71 


210 


437 


647 


522 


80.7% 


125 


Randolph 


220 


864 


1,084 


555 


51.2% 


529 


286 


1,037 


1,323 


999 


75.5% 


324 


District Totals 


602 


1,056 


1,658 


1,058 


63.8% 


600 


496 


1,474 


1,970 


1,521 


77.2% 


449 


District 20 


























Anson 


88 


166 


254 


227 


89.4% 


27 


107 


352 


459 


387 


84.3% 


72 


Moore 


94 


685 


779 


596 


76.5% 


183 


99 


499 


598 


497 


83.1% 


101 


Richmond 


132 


410 


542 


436 


80.4% 


106 


173 


410 


583 


489 


83.9% 


94 


Stanly 


98 


207 


305 


251 


82.3% 


54 


85 


336 


421 


369 


87.6% 


52 


Union 


126 


499 


625 


461 


73.8% 


164 


122 


466 


588 


406 


69.0% 


182 


District Totals 


538 


1,967 


2,505 


1,971 


78.7% 


534 


586 


2,063 


2,649 


2,148 


81.1% 


501 


District 21 


























Forsyth 


317 


2,265 


2,582 


1,765 


68.4% 


817 


304 


1,967 


2,271 


1,944 


85.6% 


327 


District 22 


























Alexander 


14 


98 


112 


82 


73.2% 


30 


32 


183 


215 


189 


87.9% 


26 


Davidson 


118 


633 


751 


523 


69.6% 


228 


139 


627 


766 


672 


87.7% 


94 


Davie 


9 


57 


66 


50 


75.8% 


16 


47 


124 


171 


142 


83.0% 


29 


Iredell 


94 


411 


505 


355 


70.3% 


150 


169 


703 


872 


750 


86.0% 


122 


District Totals 


235 


1,199 


1,434 


1,010 


70.4% 


424 


387 


1,637 


2,024 


1,753 


86.6% 


271 


District 23 


























Alleghany 


13 


20 


33 


18 


54.5% 


15 


21 


33 


54 


28 


51.9% 


26 


Ashe 


50 


82 


132 


59 


44.7% 


73 


19 


65 


84 


39 


46.4% 


45 


Wilkes 


122 


212 


334 


197 


59.0% 


137 


115 


309 


424 


282 


66.5% 


142 


Yadkin 


21 


107 


128 


112 


87.5% 


16 


29 


87 


116 


112 


96.6% 


4 


District Totals 


206 


421 


627 


386 


61.6% 


241 


184 


494 


678 


461 


68.0% 


217 


District 21 


























Avery 


6 


41 


47 


16 


34.0% 


31 


1 


29 


30 


10 


33.3% 


20 


Madison 


77 


51 


128 


104 


81.3% 


24 


17 


18 


35 


25 


71.4% 


10 


Mitchell 


56 


104 


160 


98 


61.3% 


62 


7 


41 


48 


28 


58.3% 


20 


Watauga 


78 


294 


372 


173 


46.5% 


199 


17 


98 


115 


70 


60.9% 


45 


Yancey 


40 


19 


59 


28 


47.5% 


31 


13 


22 


35 


9 


25.7% 


26 


District Totals 


257 


509 


766 


419 


54.7% 


347 


55 


208 


263 


142 


54.0% 


121 


District 25 


























Burke 


310 


551 


861 


534 


62.0% 


327 


271 


784 


1,055 


732 


69.4% 


323 


Caldwell 


189 


453 


642 


445 


69.3% 


197 


188 


531 


719 


503 


70.0% 


216 


Catawba 


364 


1,259 


1,623 


729 


44.9% 


894 


362 


749 


1,111 


716 


64.4% 


395 


District Totals 


863 


2,263 


3,126 


1,708 


54.6% 


1,418 


821 


2,064 


2,885 


1,951 


67.6% 


934 


District 26 


























Mecklenburg 


1,506 


3,114 


4,620 


3,567 


77.2% 


1,053 


634 


1,615 


2,249 


1,709 


76.0% 


540 



109 



District 27A 
Gaston 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Begin 
Pending 
" 1 S6 



270 



Felonies 



End 
Total % Caseload Pending 

Filed Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/87 



1,121 1,697 1,375 



11.0% 322 



Misdemeanors 



Begin 

Pending Total 

7/1/86 Filed Caseload Disposed 



End 
% Caseload Pending 
Disposed 6/30/87 



282 810 1,092 



866 



79.3% 



226 



District 27B 



Cleveland 


214 


582 


796 


649 


81.5% 


147 


121 


338 


459 


382 


83.2% 


77 


Lincoln 


125 


395 


520 


435 


83.7% 


85 


53 


161 


214 


174 


81.3% 


40 


District Totals 


339 


977 


1,316 


1,084 


82.4% 


232 


174 


499 


673 


556 


82.6% 


117 


District 28 


























3uncombe 


454 


831 


1,335 


1,049 


78.6% 


286 


38 


326 


364 


240 


65.9% 


124 


District 29 


























Henderson 


115 


249 


364 


272 


74.7% 


92 


66 


202 


268 


198 


73.9% 


70 


McDowell 


39 


229 


268 


168 


62.7% 


100 


32 


147 


179 


125 


69.8% 


54 


Polk 


41 


46 


87 


57 


65.5% 


30 


27 


31 


58 


40 


69.0% 


18 


Rutherford 


160 


415 


575 


402 


69.9% 


173 


103 


297 


400 


279 


69.8% 


121 


Transylvania 


64 


168 


232 


145 


62.5% 


87 


16 


35 


51 


29 


56.9% 


22 


District Totals 


419 


1,107 


1,526 


1,044 


68.4% 


482 


244 


712 


956 


671 


70.2% 


285 


District 30 


























Cherokee 


33 


3<J 


117 


23 


19.7% 


94 


65 


55 


120 


52 


43.3% 


68 


Clay 


35 


29 


64 


57 


89.1% 


7 


1 


30 


31 


20 


64.5% 


11 


Graham 


16 


57 


73 


32 


43.8% 


41 


14 


53 


67 


47 


70.1% 


20 


Haywood 


181 


325 


506 


407 


80.4% 


99 


9b 


176 


271 


240 


88.6% 


31 


Jackson 


3-7 


197 


234 


158 


67.5% 


76 


16 


51 


67 


49 


73.1% 


18 


Macon 


38 


108 


146 


83 


56.8% 


63 


28 


46 


74 


61 


82.4% 


13 


Swain 


57 


74 


131 


74 


56.5% 


57 


22 


23 


45 


32 


71.1% 


13 


District Totals 


447 


824 


1,271 


834 


65.6% 


437 


241 


434 


675 


501 


74.2% 


174 


State Totals 16 


,122 


51 ,210 


67,332 


48,890 


72.6% 


18,442 


9,111 


32,268 41 


,379 


32,246 


77.9% 


9,133 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 

Other 
(1,428) 



Dismissal 
(14,919) 



Not Guilty Plea 

(Jury Trial) 

(1,950) 




Guilty Plea to Offense 
Charged 
(25,293) 



4.0% 



Guilty Plea to 

Lesser Offense 

(5,300) 



Guilty pleas continue to account for more than 60% of 
all superior court felony dispositions, with the over- 
whelming majority of these being guilty pleas to the 
offense as charged. Dismissals on this chart include 
voluntary dismissals with and without leave, and speedy 
trial dismissals. "Other" dispositions, i.e. those which 



do not fall into the specific categories given on this 
chart, may include change of venue, dismissal by the 
court, no true bill, dispositions of writs of habeas cor- 
pus from fugitive warrants, and dispositions of proba- 
tion violations from other countries. 



Ill 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Guiltv Pleas DA Dismissal 







VI Ul 11 


y r i c a a 






U t\ l/l. 


Mil l».1 1 




Speedy 






Total 






As 


Lesser 


Jury 


Without 


With 


After Deferred 


Trial 




Total 


Negotiated 






Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prose* 


■ution 


Dismissals 


Other D 


ispositions 


Pleas 


District 1 




























Camden 




11 








4 















2 


17 


12 


Chowan 




12 


43 


6 


8 















5 


74 


62 


Currituck 




17 


2 


l 


11 


1 












7 


39 


4 


Dare 




83 


71 


4 


93 


7 












28 


286 


71 


Gates 




9 


14 





7 


2 












1 


33 


25 


Pasquotank 




79 


34 


20 


61 


6 















200 


128 


Perquimans 




|J| 


5 


1 


11 


















31 


21 


District 


Totals 


225 


169 


32 


195 


16 












43 


680 


323 


J of Tote 


il 


33. IX 


24.9* 


4.7* 


28.7* 


2.4* 





.0* 





.0* 


6.3* 


100.0* 


47.5* 


District 2 




























Beaufort 




379 


40 


20 


57 


42 












6 


544 


407 


Hyde 




23 


3 


6 


19 


3 












2 


56 


31 


Martin 




89 


12 


10 


16 


2 












1 


130 


74 


Tyrrell 




10 


11 


3 


2 















3 


29 


17 


Washington 




23 


10 


21 


4 


3 












2 


63 


22 


District 


Totals 


524 


76 


60 


98 


50 












14 


822 


551 


J of Total 


63.7% 


9.2* 


7.3* 


11.9* 


6.1* 





.0* 





.0* 


1.7* 


100.0* 


67.0* 


District 3 




























Carteret 




120 


2 


6 


60 


15 









2 


3 


208 


134 


Craven 




173 


91 


20 


124 


23 












27 


458 


329 


Pamlicc 




36 








12 


3 












14 


65 


53 


Pitt 




796 


154 


34 


147 


17 












21 


1,169 


777 


District 


Totals 


1,125 


247 


60 


343 


58 









2 


65 


1,900 


1,293 


J of Total 


59. 2* 


13.0* 


3.2* 


18.1* 


3.1* 





.0* 





.1* 


3.4* 


100.0* 


68.1* 


District 4 




























Duplin 




140 


113 


15 


229 


5 












3 


505 


384 


Jones 




17 


13 


2 


18 















9 


59 


35 


Onslow 




812 





74 


420 


8 












14 


1,328 


750 


Sampson 




236 





18 


127 


2 












3 


386 


274 


District 


Totals 


1,205 


126 


109 


794 


15 












29 


2,278 


1,443 


J of Totj 


il 


52. 9* 


5.5* 


4.8* 


34.9* 


0.7* 





.0% 





.0* 


1.3* 


100.0* 


63.3* 


District 5 




























New Hanover 




977 


228 


124 


539 


94 












21 


1,983 


364 


Pender 




128 


31 


42 


463 


1 












8 


673 


586 


District 


Totals 


1,105 


259 


166 


1,002 


95 












29 


2,656 


950 


t of TotJ 


il 


11.6* 


9.8* 


6.3* 


37.7* 


3.6* 





.0* 





.0* 


1.1* 


100.0* 


35.8* 


District 6 




























Bertie 




3 


72 


5 


12 


1 




(J 







8 


101 


82 


Halifax 




144 


57 


1 1 


94 


18 




6 







5 


335 


271 


Hertford 




109 


21 


9 


41 


5 












7 


192 


170 


Northamptor 


i 


54 


1i) 


12 


33 


3 












3 


119 


97 


District 


Totals 


310 


164 


37 


180 


27 




6 







23 


747 


620 


J of Total 


41.5* 


22.0* 


5.0* 


24.1* 


3.6* 





.8% 





.0* 


3.1* 


100.0* 


83.0* 


District 7 




























'-. -i g e i 'j ■: % h 




87 


38 


l 1 


115 


l 












36 


288 


189 


flash 




445 


77 


11 


166 


2 












7 


708 


501 


Wilson 




191 


32 


17 


75 


12 












19 


346 


221 


District 


Totals 


723 


147 


39 


356 


15 












62 


1,342 


911 


J of Total 


53.95 


11 .0* 


2.9* 


26.5* 


1.1* 





.0* 





.0* 


4.6* 


100.0* 


67.9* 



112 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Guilty Pleas 



DA Dismissal 



Speedy Total 

As Lesser Jury Without With After Deferred Trial Total Negotiated 

Charged Offense Trials Leave Leave Prosecution Dismissals Other Dispositions Pleas 



District 8 



Greene 


8 


42 


2 


23 


4 










5 


84 


62 


Lenoir 


112 


60 


23 


84 


32 







2 


9 


322 


216 


Wayne 


218 


93 


35 


178 


13 










15 


552 


303 


District Totals 


338 


195 


60 


285 


49 







2 


29 


958 


581 


% of Total 


35.3% 


20. 4% 


6.3% 


29.7% 


5.1% 


0.0% 





.2% 


3.0% 


100.0% 


60.6% 


District 9 
























Franklin 


124 





3 


13 


2 










11 


153 


130 


Granville 


121 


48 


10 


77 


21 


2 







5 


284 


169 


Person 


89 


27 


8 


41 













1 


166 


117 


Vance 


250 





15 


74 


7 










6 


352 


246 


Warren 


54 


1 


4 


22 


2 










2 


85 


51 


District Totals 


638 


76 


40 


227 


32 


2 







25 


1,040 


713 


% of Total 


61.3% 


7.3% 


3.8% 


21.8% 


3.1% 


0.2% 





.0% 


2.4% 


100.0% 


68.6% 


District 10 
























Wake 


1,894 


237 


64 


1,233 


345 


1 




8 


54 


3,836 


2,119 


% of Total 


49.4% 


6.2% 


1.7% 


32.1% 


9.0% 


.0% 





.2% 


1.4% 


100.0% 


55.2% 


District 11 
























Harnett 


194 


26 


21 


44 





1 







9 


295 


202 


Johnston 


191 


20 


21 


31 


7 










6 


276 


213 


Lee 


229 


140 


11 


66 


13 













459 


372 


District Totals 


614 


186 


53 


141 


20 


1 







15 


1,030 


787 


% of Total 


59.6% 


18.1% 


5.1% 


13.7% 


1.9% 


0.1% 





.0% 


1.5% 


100.0% 


76.4% 


District 12 
























Cumberland 


908 


116 


66 


173 


47 










46 


1,356 


974 


Hoke 


114 


1 





5 













4 


124 


104 


District Totals 


1,022 


117 


66 


178 


47 










50 


1,480 


1,078 


% of Total 


69. 1% 


7.9% 


4.5% 


12.0% 


3.2% 


0.0% 





.0% 


3.4% 


100.0% 


72.8% 


District 13 
























Bladen 


112 


8 


3 


32 













26 


181 


123 


Brunswick 


96 


51 


11 


164 


4 










35 


361 


281 


Columbus 


120 


28 


20 


28 













16 


212 


141 


District Totals 


328 


87 


34 


224 


4 










77 


754 


545 


% of Total 


43.51 


11.5% 


4.5% 


29.7% 


0.5% 


0.0% 





.0% 


10.2% 


100.0% 


72.3% 


District 14 
























Durham 


1,107 





42 


347 


15 










30 


1,541 


1,109 


% of Total 


71.8% 


0.0% 


2.7% 


22.5% 


1.0% 


0.0% 





.0% 


1.9% 


100.0% 


72.0% 


District 15A 
























Alamance 


784 


12 


75 


218 


4 










48 


1,141 


748 


% of Total 


68.7% 


1.1% 


6.6% 


19.1% 


0.4% 


0.0% 





.0% 


4.2% 


100.0% 


65.6% 


District 15B 
























Chatham 


60 


17 


8 


24 


8 


4 







3 


124 


94 


Orange 


154 


48 


20 


198 


10 










32 


462 


302 


District Totals 


214 


65 


28 


222 


18 


4 







35 


586 


396 


% of Total 


36.5% 


11.1% 


4.8% 


37.9% 


3.1% 


0.7% 





.0% 


6.0% 


100.0% 


67.6% 


District 16 

























Robeson 
Scotland 



933 
339 



103 

24 



73 
4 



28 

1 



48 
15 



1,192 
390 



257 
165 



District Totals 
% of Total 



1,272 
80.4% 



13 
0.8% 



127 

8.0% 



77 
4.9% 



29 
1.8% 




0.0% 



0.1% 



63 
4.0% 



1,582 
100.0% 



422 
26.7% 



113 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Guilty Pleas DA Dismissal 



As 
Charged 



Lesser 
Offense 



Speedy Total 

Jury Without With After Deferred Trial Total Negotiated 

Trials Leave Leave Prosecution Dismissals Other Dispositions Pleas 



District 17A 

Caswell 

Rockingham 



58 
577 



15 

44 



2 
14 



5 

154 



4 
17 



84 
813 



23 

634 



District Totals 635 
% of Total 70.81 



59 

6.6% 



16 159 
1.8% 17.75 



7 
0.8% 




0.0% 




0.0% 



21 
2.3% 



897 
100.0% 



657 
73.2% 



District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 



205 
441 



22 

52 



15 

4 



3 

34 



19 
2 



6 

15 



270 
548 



17 
296 



District Totals 
% of Total 



646 
79.0% 



74 
9.0% 



19 
2.3% 



37 
4.5% 



21 
2.6% 




0.0% 




0.0% 



21 
2.6% 



818 
100.0% 



313 
38.3% 



District 18 
Guilford 
% of Total 



2,494 
65.2% 




0.0% 



76 1,023 
2.0% 26.7% 



149 
3.9% 




0.0% 




0.0% 



84 3,826 
2.2% 100.0% 



2,332 
61.0% 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 



431 
335 



District Totals 766 
% of Total 44.9% 



80 
96 

176 
10.3% 



25 

22 

47 



398 
272 

670 
39.3% 



15 

10 

25 
1.5% 







0.0% 







0.0% 



8 
14 

22 

1.3% 



957 
749 

1,706 

100.0% 



430 
528 

958 

56.2% 



District 1 9B 

Montgomery 129 49 7 

Randolph 309 41 23 

District Totals 438 90 30 377 

J of Total 41.4% 8.5% 2.8% 35.6% 



274 
103 



6 
24 

30 







0.0% 







0.0% 



38 
55 

93 

3.8% 



503 
555 

1,058 
100.0% 



179 
336 

515 
48.7% 



District 20 

Anson 51 76 

Moore 170 50 

Richmond 171 77 

Stanly 87 36 

Union 78 181 

District Totals 557 420 

% of Total 28.3% 21.3% 



5 82 

7 358 

12 162 

14 111 

7 188 



45 
2.3% 



901 
45.7% 



11 

7 
2 

2 

22 
1.1% 






o 
o 




0.0% 











0.0% 



2 

11 

7 

1 

5 

26 
1.3% 



227 
596 
436 
251 
461 

1,971 
100.0% 



139 
555 
357 
203 
395 

1,649 
83.7% 



District 21 
Forsyth 

% of Total 



1,055 
59.8% 



310 

17.6% 



33 
1.9% 



317 



26 
1.5% 




0.0% 




0.0% 



24 
1.4% 



1,765 
100.0% 



900 
51.0% 



District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 



45 
327 

32 
192 



9 

71 

5 

31 



5 19 

17 62 

7 5 

26 62 



4 
43 

1 
40 



82 
523 

50 
355 



56 
201 

26 
134 



District Totals 596 
% of Total 59.05 



116 

11 .55 



55 
5.4% 



148 
14.7% 



7 
0.7? 




0.0% 




0.0% 



88 1,010 
3.7% 100.0% 



417 
41.3% 



District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 




29 

50 



1 

12 

18 

7 



5 9 
7 2 

21 57 

6 4 



1 

9 

13 
5 



18 

59 

197 

112 



7 

46 
87 
80 



District Totals 
% of Total 



205 
53.11 



; ; ; 



39 72 
10.1% 18.7% 



1.( 




0.0% 




0.0% 



28 
7.3% 



386 
100.0% 



220 
57.0% 



114 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 





Gui 


Ity Pleas 


Jury 
Trials 




DA Dismissal 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other D 


Total 
spositions 


Total 




As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Offense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 




6 

16 

23 




7 
26 
14 
71 
10 


4 

16 
2 

11 
2 


4 
24 
60 
60 
15 



6 

4 
4 





7 









4 




1 

19 
2 

1 


16 
104 

98 
173 

28 


9 

45 

68 

117 

19 


District Totals 
% of Total 


45 
10.7% 


128 
30.5% 


35 
8.4% 


163 
38.9% 


14 
3.3% 


7 
1.7% 


4 
1.0% 


23 
5.5% 


419 
100.0% 


258 
61.6% 


District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 


172 

140 
354 


86 

91 
6 


16 
20 
15 


226 
161 
335 


19 

9 
6 









1 




15 

23 
13 


534 
445 
729 


384 
328 
386 


District Totals 
% of Total 


666 
39.0% 


183 
10.7% 


51 
3.0% 


722 
42.3% 


34 
2.0% 



0.0% 


1 

0.1% 


51 
3.0% 


1,708 
100.0% 


1,098 
64.3% 


District 26 
Mecklenburg 
% of Total 


1,054 
29.5% 


1,010 
28.3% 


152 
4.3% 


1,051 
29.5% 


219 
6.1% 


3 
0.1% 


2 
0.1% 


76 
2.1% 


3,567 
100.0% 


1,021 
28.6% 


District 27A 
Gaston 

% of Total 


651 
47.3% 



0.0% 


75 
5.5% 


523 
38.0% 


87 
6.3% 


1 

0.1% 


3 

0.2% 


35 
2.5% 


1,375 
100.0% 


624 
45.4% 


District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 


369 
264 


64 
51 


18 

14 


166 
98 


9 













23 
8 


649 
435 


416 
215 


District Totals 
% of Total 


633 
58.4% 


115 
10.6% 


32 
3.0% 


264 
24.4% 


9 
0.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


31 
2.9% 


1,084 
100.0% 


631 
58.2% 


District 28 
Buncombe 
% of Total 


336 
79.7% 


1 
0.1% 


21 
2.0% 


135 
12.9% 


41 
3.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


15 
1.4% 


1,049 
100.0% 


382 
36.4% 


District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


147 
49 
23 

118 
70 


36 

41 

11 

107 

4 


14 

12 

7 

34 

3 


44 
51 
15 
110 
62 


19 
5 


28 
1 


















12 

10 
1 
5 

5 


272 
168 
57 
402 
145 


183 
83 
37 

217 
98 


District Totals 
% of Total 


407 
39.0% 


199 
19.1% 


70 
6.7% 


282 
27.0% 


53 
5.1% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


33 
3.2% 


1,044 
100.0% 


618 
59.2% 


District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 


4 
2 
1 

120 
25 
15 
14 



14 
16 
84 
56 
13 
22 


5 
6 

12 

20 

15 

4 




14 

18 

3 

156 

54 
37 
29 



4 

9 

5 




13 




1 




















18 
7 
9 
9 


23 
57 
32 
407 
158 
83 
74 


10 
30 
28 
222 
120 
51 
55 


District Totals 
% of Total 


181 
21.7% 


205 
24.6% 


62 
7.4% 


311 
37.3% 


18 
2.2% 


14 
1 .7% 



0.0% 


43 
5.2% 


834 
100.0% 


516 
61.9% 


State Totals 
% of Total 


25,293 
51.7% 


5,300 
10.8% 


1,950 

4.0% 


13,275 
27.2% 


1,605 
3.3% 


39 
0.1% 


23 

.0% 


1,405 
2.9% 


48,890 
100.0% 


27,698 
56.7% 



115 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Other 
(11,320) 



Dismissal 
(8,147) 



Guilty pleas account for about 36% of misdemeanor dis- 
positions in superior court, the overwhelming majority of 
which are guilty pleas to the offense charged. The "other" 
category on this chart includes withdrawn appeals, cases 
remanded to district court for judgment, and other mis- 
cellaneous dispositions such as change of venue, dismissal 




Guilty Plea to Offense 
Charged 
(10,209) 



Guilty Plea to 

Lesser Offense 

(1,448) 

3.5% 

Not Guilty Plea 

(Jury Trial) 

(1,122) 

by the court, no true bill, probation violations from other 
counties, and dispositions of writs of habeas corpus from 
fugitive warrants. Dismissals on this chart include volun- 
tary dismissals with and without leave, and speedy trial 
dismissals. 



116 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Guilty Pleas DA Dismissal 

Total 
Other Dispositions 



As 
Charged 



Lesser 
Offense 



Jury 
Trials 



Without 
Leave 



With 
Leave 



After Deferred 
Prosecution 



Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 



Total 

Negotiated 

Pleas 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



16 
44 
52 
94 
34 
155 
50 



6 
9 
11 
57 
10 
19 
9 



2 
5 
1 

19 
1 

15 
9 



7 
7 

18 
54 
5 
74 
16 



2 



3 

7 

12 

24 





13 

125 

4 

100 

28 
346 

47 



46 
190 

89 
333 

90 
633 
131 



1 

22 


14 
11 

77 
12 



District Totals 
% of Total 



445 
29. 4% 



121 

8.0% 



52 

3.4% 



181 
12.0% 



48 
3.2% 




0.0% 



2 

0.1% 



663 
43.8% 



1,512 
100.0% 



137 

9.1% 



District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 



149 

7 

21 

8 
9 



11 

5 
1 
3 



16 
6 
5 

4 
4 



55 
7 

16 
2 
2 



11 
4 
3 





33 
12 
30 
12 

39 



275 
36 

80 
27 
65 



75 

11 

6 


5 



District Totals 
% of Total 



194 
40.2% 



20 

4.1% 



35 
7.2% 



82 
17.0% 



26 

5.4% 




0.0% 




.0% 



126 
26.1% 



483 
100.0% 



97 
20.1% 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 



66 

188 

6 

464 



2 
19 


33 



10 

29 

5 

24 



24 

74 

7 

148 



28 

10 



27 



44 

78 

6 

436 



174 

398 

24 

1,133 



28 
153 

11 
376 



District Totals 
% of Total 



724 
41.9% 



54 
3.1% 



68 
3.9% 



253 

14.6% 



65 




0.0% 



1 

.1% 



564 
32.6% 



1,729 
100.0% 



568 
32.9% 



District 4 

Duplin 12 5 

Jones 2 

Onslow 157 

Sampson 33 

District Totals 204 5 

% of Total 43.5% 1.1% 



24 
5.1% 



16 

5 

84 

15 

120 
25.6% 



2 


18 
7 

27 









0.0% 










0.0% 



18 

1 

60 

10 



19.0% 



56 

9 

337 

67 

469 
100.0% 



20 

6 

115 

17 

158 
33.7% 



District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 



394 
20 



27 
5 



30 
2 



196 

13 



35 
3 



169 

13 



851 

56 



85 
21 



District Totals 
% of Total 



414 
45.6% 



32 

3.5% 



32 
3.5% 



209 
23.0% 



38 

4.2% 




0.0% 




0.0% 



182 

20.1% 



907 
100.0% 



106 
11.7% 



District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 



2 

140 
49 
32 



39 
23 

6 
4 



22 
95 
19 
14 



1 

22 
6 
9 



20 
80 
40 
21 



85 
366 
121 

82 



45 
113 

47 
30 



District Totals 
% of Total 



223 

34.1% 



72 
11.0% 



10 
1.5% 



150 
22.9% 



38 
5.8? 




0.0% 




0.0% 



161 
24.6% 



654 
100.0% 



235 
35.9% 



District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 



41 
78 
49 



9 

18 
9 



11 

11 
6 



67 
49 
31 



7 

10 

10 









43 

57 

102 



178 
223 
207 



47 
23 

28 



District Totals 
% of Total 



168 
27.6% 



36 
5.9% 



28 

4.6% 



147 

24.2% 



27 
4.45 




0.0% 




0.0% 



202 
33.2% 



608 
100.0% 



98 
16.1% 



117 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Gui "> Pleas DA Dismissal speedy Total 

Lesser Jury Without With After Deferred Trial Total Negotiated 

Offense Trials Leave Leave Prosecution Dismissals Other Dispositions Pleas 



As 
Charged 



District 8 

Greene 20 12 

Lenoir 92 35 

Wayne 190 58 

District Totals 302 105 

% of Total 23.01 8.0% 

District 9 

Franklin 57 

Granville 88 11 

Person 56 13 

Vance 182 

Warren 66 5 

District Totals 449 29 

% of Total 46. 4% 3.0% 

District 10 

Wake 336 22 

J of Total 20.71 1.4% 

District 1 1 

Harnett 47 3 

Johnston 111 6 

Lee 60 47 

District Totals 218 56 

% of Total 38.3% 9.8% 

District 12 

Cumberland 65 1 

Hoke 18 

District Totals 83 1 

% of Total 20.0% 0.2% 

District 13 

Bladen 35 20 

Brunswick 57 15 

Columbus 71 13 

District Totals 163 48 

% of Total 30.0% 8.8% 

District 14 

Durham 139 1 

% of Total 44.6% 0.3% 

District 15A 

Alamance 358 1 

% of Total 50.6% 0.1% 

District 15B 

Cnatham 11 14 

>?:'.?<; 8 3 

District Total3 19 17 

% of Total 13.%% 12.3% 

District 16 

-coe3on 335 

Scotland 130 

District Totals 465 

% of Total 41.6% 0.0% 



2 
30 

19 



23 
110 
117 



4 
23 

17 



51 250 44 
3.9% 19.0% 3.4% 



4 20 1 

6 42 23 

3 42 1 

4 77 9 
3 27 2 

20 208 36 

2.1% 21.5% 3.75 



24 391 433 
1.5% 24.1% 26.6% 



3 24 2 
7 34 10 
5 33 18 



15 
2.6% 



lb 
5 



'i 
3 

12 
3.7% 



47 
17 

64 
5.7% 



91 
16.0% 



36 



20 44 
4.8% 10.6% 



9 20 

6 26 

15 48 

30 94 

5.5% 17.3% 



15 

28 

43 
31.2% 



38 
6 

44 



30 
5.3% 



24 


24 
5.8% 



7 

2 
5 

14 
2.6% 



21 79 1 
6.7% 25.3% 0.3% 



22 101 10 
3.1% 14.3% 1.4% 



2 

1 

3 
2.2% 



45 

1 

46 
4.1% 









0.0% 











0.0% 




0.0% 








0.0% 







0.0% 



0.2% 




0.0% 




0.0% 



(J 




0.05 







0.0% 









30 
173 
358 


91 
463 
759 


14 

72 

195 



0.0% 


561 
42.7% 


1,313 
100.0% 


281 
21.4% 










34 
64 
66 
50 
11 


116 
234 
181 
322 
114 


60 
93 
67 
157 
65 



0.0% 


225 
23.3% 


967 
100.0% 


442 
45.7% 



0.0% 


419 
25.8% 


1,625 
100.0% 


335 
20.6% 







13 
69 
7.7 


92 
237 
240 


42 
108 
109 



0.0% 


159 
27.9% 


569 
100.0% 


259 

45.5% 






235 
7 


376 
38 


46 
15 



0.0% 


242 
58.5% 


414 
100.0% 


61 
14.7% 








35 

39 

119 


126 
146 
271 


50 
84 
66 



0.0% 


193 
35.5% 


543 
100.0% 


200 
36.8% 



0.0% 


71 
22.8% 


312 
100.0% 


141 
45.2% 



0.0% 


215 
30.4% 


707 
100.0% 


323 
45.7% 







18 
26 


69 
69 


33 
19 



0.0% 


44 
31.9% 


138 
100.0% 


52 
37.7% 


3 




331 
164 


799 
318 


161 
42 


3 
0.3% 


495 
44.3% 


1,117 
100.0% 


203 
18.2% 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 





UUllt 


y neas 


Jury 




Ui\ u\ 


simssai 




Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 
Negotiated 




As 


Lesser 


Without 


With 


After Deferred 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 17A 


























Caswell 


75 


26 


3 


19 















37 


160 


57 


Rockingham 


333 


17 


26 


62 


16 












237 


691 


269 


District Totals 


408 


43 


29 


81 


16 












274 


851 


326 


% of Total 


17.9% 


5.1% 


3.4% 


9.5% 


1.9% 





.0% 





.0% 


32.2% 


100.0% 


38.3% 


District 17B 


























Stokes 


111 


18 


10 


3 


9 












48 


199 


3 


Surry 


312 


12 


6 


17 


17 












216 


580 


72 


District Totals 


423 


30 


16 


20 


26 












264 


779 


75 


% of Total 


54.3% 


3.9% 


2.1% 


2.6% 


3.3% 





.0% 





.0% 


33.9% 


100.0% 


9.6% 


District 18 


























Guilford 


380 





21 


259 


46 












247 


953 


327 


% of Total 


39.9% 


0.0% 


2.2% 


27.2% 


4.8% 





.0% 





.0% 


25.9% 


100.0% 


34.3% 


District 19A 


























Cabarrus 


167 


7 


17 


144 


65 












193 


593 


75 


Rowan 


145 


10 


22 


113 


37 












213 


540 


130 


District Totals 


312 


17 


39 


257 


102 












406 


1,133 


205 


% of Total 


27.5% 


1.5% 


3.4% 


22.7% 


9.0% 





.0% 





.0% 


35.8% 


100.0% 


18.1% 


District 19B 


























Montgomery 


174 


28 


7 


115 


30 












168 


522 


180 


Randolph 


371 


4 


9 


147 


103 









1 


364 


999 


299 


District Totals 


545 


32 


16 


262 


133 









1 


532 


1,521 


479 


% of Total 


35.8% 


2.1% 


1.1% 


17.2% 


8.7% 





.0% 





.1% 


35.0% 


100.0% 


31.5% 


District 20 


























Anson 


72 


59 


8 


72 


8 












168 


387 


64 


Moore 


124 


19 


1 


126 


5 












222 


497 


222 


Richmond 


99 


37 


4 


152 


21 












176 


489 


244 


Stanly 


115 


21 


6 


81 


14 












132 


369 


122 


Union 


77 


54 


12 


120 


8 












135 


406 


152 


District Totals 


487 


190 


31 


551 


56 












833 


2,148 


804 


% of Total 


22.7% 


8.8% 


1.4% 


25.7% 


2.6% 





.0% 





.0% 


38.8% 


100.0% 


37.4% 


District 21 


























Forsyth 


803 


92 


32 


265 


53 












699 


1,944 


518 


% of Total 


41.3% 


4.7% 


1.6% 


13.6% 


2.7% 





.OX 





.0% 


36.0% 


100.0% 


26.6% 


District 22 


























Alexander 


53 


5 


13 


17 


2 












99 


189 


50 


Davidson 


136 


27 


10 


111 


18 












370 


672 


60 


Davie 


28 


13 


8 


15 


15 












63 


142 


8 


Iredell 


137 


16 


17 


86 


23 












471 


750 


65 


District Totals 


354 


61 


48 


229 


58 












1,003 


1,753 


183 


% of Total 


20.2% 


3.5% 


2.7% 


13.1% 


3.3% 





.ox 





.0% 


57.2% 


100.0% 


10.4% 


District 23 


























Alleghany 








2 


2 















24 


28 





Ashe 


4 


1 


4 


3 















27 


39 


3 


Wilkes 


58 


9 


12 


47 















156 


282 


30 


Yadkin 


29 


1 


6 


16 


1 












59 


112 


25 


District Totals 


91 


11 


24 


68 


1 












266 


461 


58 


% of Total 


19.7% 


2.4% 


5.2% 


14.8% 


0.2% 





.0% 





.ox 


57.7% 


100.0% 


12.6% 



119 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Guiltv Pleas DA Dismissal 



As 

Charged 



Lesser 
Offense 



Jury 
Trials 



Without 
Leave 



With 
Leave 



After Deferred 
Prosecution 



Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 



Total 
Other Dispositions 



Total 

Negotiated 

Pleas 



District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 



2 
1 

5 
34 

o 



7 
7 

2 

14 





1 
7 
7 
11 
1 



10 
25 
28 
70 
9 



2 

4 

8 

43 





District Totals 
% of Total 



29 
20.4% 



42 
29.6% 



12 
5.5% 



30 
21.15 



2 
1 .43 




0.0% 




0.0% 



27 
19.01 



142 
100.0% 



57 
40.1% 



District 25 
3urke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 



107 
100 

184 



31 

18 

3 



20 
15 

10 



86 
129 



25 
27 

48 



451 

1 256 
8 334 



732 
503 
716 



157 
127 
113 



District Totals 
% of Total 



391 

20.0% 



52 
2.7% 



45 
2.3% 



313 

16.05 



100 
5.1% 




0.0% 



9 
0.5% 



1,041 
53.4% 



1,951 
100.0% 



397 
20.3% 



District 26 
Mecklenburg 
% of Total 



212 

12.4% 



141 
8.3% 



69 
4.0% 



830 
48.6% 



58 
3.4% 



2 

0.1% 



0.1% 



396 
23.2% 



1,709 
100.0% 



146 
8.5% 



District 27A 
Gaston 

% of Total 



214 

24.7% 




0.0% 



68 241 
7.9% 27.8% 



133 

15.4% 




0.0% 



3 
0.3% 



207 
23.9% 



866 
100.0% 



148 
17.1% 



District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 



141 
66 



20 
15 



24 
6 



84 
44 



101 

42 



382 
174 



130 
39 



District Totals 207 
% of Total 37.2% 



35 
6.3% 



30 
5.4% 



128 
23.05 



1.4% 




0.0% 



5 
0.9% 



143 
25.7% 



556 
100.0% 



169 
30.4% 



District 28 
3uncombe 
% of Total 



106 

44.2% 




0.0% 



31 
12.9% 




0.0? 




0.0% 



80 
33.3% 



240 
100.0% 



66 
27.5% 



District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 



73 
36 
14 
93 
6 



4 
8 

10 




1 1 
8 
3 

21 
2 



37 

32 

9 

60 



7 
10 
3 
9 




66 
31 

11 

86 
13 



198 
125 

40 
279 

29 



63 
22 

5 
75 

5 



District Totals 
% of Total 



222 
33.15 



22 

3.35 



45 146 
6.7% 21.8% 



29 
4.3% 




0.0% 





.0% 



207 
30.8% 



671 

100.0% 



170 
25.3% 



District 30 
". '. e r 'j /. t <± 
Clay 
j r a -. % " 
Haywood 
'.h-./.z'j r, 
Macon 
Swain 



29 

10 
02 

4 
13 

5 



2 

2 

11 

17 

21 

4 



5 

4 
14 
26 

3 

6 

2 



16 
3 
9 

75 

14 

27 
16 




2 

11 
1 


1 





1 

3 

59 
5 

11 
5 



52 
20 
47 
240 
49 
61 
32 



14 
17 
32 
61 

27 
27 
13 



District Totals 
% of Total 



121 
24.2% 



60 
12.0% 



60 
12.0? 



160 
31.95 



15 
3.0% 



0.2% 




0.0% 



84 
16.8% 



501 

100.0% 



191 

38.1% 



State Totals 
% of Total 



10,209 
31.7% 



1,448 
4.5% 



1,122 6,358 1,760 
3.5% 19.7% 5.5% 



4 
.0% 



25 

0.1% 



11,320 
35.1% 



32,246 
100.0% 



3,015 
24.9% 



120 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 



0-90 



Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 



91-120 121-180 181-365 366-730 



>730 



Total 
Pending 



Mean 
Age 



Median 
Age 



District 1 






















Camden 


Fel 


2 


4 





1 








7 


106.5 


111.0 




Mis 


10 


5 





2 


1 





18 


107.7 


72.0 


Chowan 


Fel 


24 





6 








1 


31 


103.7 


29.0 




Mis 


23 


2 


1 


3 








29 


56.3 


28.0 


Currituck 


Fel 


11 


2 





2 








15 


84.5 


53.0 




Mis 


25 


6 


11 


16 


1 





59 


120.8 


91.0 


Dare 


Fel 


39 


1 


23 


11 


2 





76 


113.3 


90.0 




Mis 


74 


13 


11 


10 


2 





110 


78.0 


56.0 


Gates 


Fel 


10 





6 








1 


17 


122.1 


35.0 




Mis 


11 


3 


2 


6 








22 


104.3 


76.5 


Pasquotank 


Fel 


51 


6 


11 


5 


1 





74 


80.8 


50.0 




Mis 


97 


13 


8 


5 








123 


65.4 


57.0 


Perquimans 


Fel 


7 


1 


1 


1 








10 


75.2 


50.0 




Mis 


27 


2 


8 


1 


1 


1 


40 


96.9 


55.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


144 


14 


47 


20 


3 


2 


230 


98.4 


50.0 


% of Total 




62.6% 


6.1% 


20.4% 


8.7% 


1.3% 


0.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


267 


44 


41 


43 


5 


1 


401 


83.6 


57.0 


% of Total 




66.6% 


11.0% 


10.2% 


10.7% 


1.2% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 2 






















Beaufort 


Fel 


28 


43 


7 


18 


3 


7 


106 


201.2 


92.0 




Mis 


69 


15 


8 


13 








105 


72.8 


53.0 


Hyde 


Fel 


5 





5 








6 


16 


643.6 


162.0 




Mis 


2 

















2 


55.0 


55.0 


Martin 


Fel 


10 


2 


15 


7 


2 





36 


145.4 


132.0 




Mis 


16 


3 


3 


13 








35 


138.0 


99.0 


Tyrrell 


Fel 


4 


2 


7 


1 


1 





15 


133.6 


132.0 




Mis 


3 


1 





2 


1 





7 


139.1 


120.0 


Washington 


Fel 


12 





1 


7 








20 


106.9 


66.0 




Mis 


10 


5 


4 


1 


1 





21 


111.6 


98.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


59 


47 


35 


33 


6 


13 


193 


212.5 


120.0 


% of Total 




30.6% 


24.4% 


18.1% 


17.1% 


3.1% 


6.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


100 


24 


15 


29 


2 





170 


93.5 


72.5 


% of Total 




2200.0% 


14.1% 


8.8% 


17.1% 


1.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 3 






















Carteret 


Fel 


16 


12 


8 


13 








49 


132.1 


99.0 




Mis 


5 


4 


1 


1 


1 





12 


126.1 


103.0 


Craven 


Fel 


84 


25 


14 


17 


2 


4 


146 


114.0 


46.0 




Mis 


48 


5 


9 


2 


1 





65 


66.1 


41.0 


Pamlico 


Fel 


10 





6 





5 





21 


180.0 


123.0 




Mis 


2 


1 














3 


72.0 


57.0 


Pitt 


Fel 


215 


86 


18 


42 


12 





373 


97.6 


77.0 




Mis 


146 


44 


38 


83 


3 





314 


118.4 


94.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


325 


123 


46 


72 


19 


4 


589 


107.5 


77.0 


% of Total 




55.2% 


20.9% 


7.8% 


12.2% 


3.2% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


201 


54 


48 


86 


5 





394 


109.7 


84.0 


% of Total 




51.0% 


13.7% 


12.2% 


21.8% 


1.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 4 






















Duplin 


Fel 


16 


1 














17 


46.0 


50.0 




Mis 


11 


1 














12 


31.0 


8.0 


Jones 


Fel 


54 





4 











58 


13.7 


4.0 




Mis 


2 


1 


1 











4 


102.0 


87.5 


Onslow 


Fel 


239 


12 


5 


2 


2 





260 


38.8 


32.0 




Mis 


29 


1 


1 


1 








32 


50.0 


31.5 


Sampson 


Fel 


6 





4 











10 


66.6 


46.0 




Mis 























0.0 


0.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


315 


13 


13 


2 


2 





345 


35.8 


29.0 


% of Total 




91.3% 


3.8% 


3.8% 


0.6% 


0.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


42 


3 


2 


1 








48 


49.6 


34.0 


% of Total 




87^5% 


6.3% 


4.2% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







121 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 









Ages 


; or Pendin 


g Cases (L 


»ays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 5 






















New Hanover 


Fel 


288 


34 


52 


13 





3 


420 


91.7 


61.0 




Mis 


95 


9 


12 


10 








126 


70.5 


50.0 


Pender 


Fel 


50 


14 


143 


1 


3 





211 


117.3 


127.0 




Mis 


19 


3 


6 


1 


1 





30 


102.1 


88.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


338 


48 


195 


44 


3 


3 


631 


100.2 


82.0 


% of Total 




53.6% 


7.6% 


30.9% 


7.0% 


0.5% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


114 


12 


18 


11 


1 





156 


76.5 


50.0 


% of Total 




73. U 


7.7% 


11 .5% 


7.1% 


0.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 6 






















Bertie 


Fel 


42 


1 


14 


3 








60 


92.8 


82.0 




Mis 


9 


1 


2 


1 








13 


92.3 


54.0 


Halifax 


Fel 


29 


7 


13 


1 


15 


1 


66 


182.2 


120.0 




Mis 


22 


2 


5 


11 


6 





46 


136.5 


93.0 


Hertford 


Fel 


25 


5 





1 


1 





32 


52.9 


8.0 




Mis 


28 


2 














30 


54.1 


56.0 


Northampton 


Fel 


17 


1 


1 


3 


1 





23 


76.0 


1.0 




Mis 


4 


2 


1 


2 








9 


113.4 


120.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


113 


14 


28 


8 


17 


1 


181 


116.2 


82.0 


J of Total 




62.4% 


0.0% 


15.5% 


4.4% 


9.4% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


63 


7 


8 


14 


6 





98 


103.2 


61.5 


% of Total 




64.3% 


7.1% 


8.2% 


14.3% 


6.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 7 






















Edgecombe 


Fel 


78 


1 


24 


6 


2 





111 


85.4 


43.0 




Mis 


57 


3 


8 


4 


2 





74 


63.8 


15.0 


Nash 


Fel 


107 


9 





3 








119 


45.9 


33.0 




Mis 


26 


2 


1 


4 


2 


3 


38 


281.6 


50.0 


Wilson 


Fel 


64 


62 


26 


5 


7 





164 


117.3 


117.0 




Mis 


18 


4 


3 


18 


4 





47 


170.2 


160.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


249 


72 


50 


14 


9 





394 


86.7 


57.5 


% of Total 




63.2% 


18.3% 


12.7% 


3.6% 


2.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


101 


9 


12 


26 


8 


3 


159 


147.3 


50.0 


% of Total 




63.5% 


5.7% 


7.5% 


16.4% 


5.0% 


1.9% 


100.0% 






District 8 






















Greene 


Fel 


10 





4 


3 








17 


96.5 


43.0 




Mis 


7 


1 


1 


3 








12 


95.5 


77.5 


Lenoir 


Fel 


37 


16 


3 


21 


1 





78 


120.2 


92.0 




Mis 


56 


9 


17 


13 


1 





96 


100.3 


72.5 


Wayne 


Fel 


110 


12 


15 


15 


9 





161 


100.7 


50.0 




Mis 


95 


15 


25 


41 


3 





179 


112.7 


81 .0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


157 


28 


22 


39 


10 





256 


106.3 


56.0 


% of Total 




61.3% 


10.9% 


8.6% 


15.2% 


3.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


158 


25 


43 


57 


4 





287 


107.9 


76.0 


% of Total 




55.1% 


8.7% 


15.0% 


19.9% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 9 






















Franklin 


Fel 


54 


13 


9 


7 


2 





85 


88.8 


75.0 




Mis 


2', 





3 


15 


7 


8 


63 


287.4 


153.0 


Granville 


Fel 


32 


■> 


5 


2 


1 





49 


85.0 


63.0 




Mis 


20 


7 


4 


3 


5 


2 


4 1 


184.7 


99.0 


Person 


Fel 


',1 


17 


8 


6 


3 


8 


83 


211.4 


96.0 




Mis 


'A 





4 


9 


13 


7 


77 


232.2 


98.0 


Vance 


Fel 


52 


10 


20 


6 


37 


7 


132 


341.4 


131.5 




•'.-. 


Vj 


9 


8 


9 


13 


5 


103 


190.3 


85.0 


Warren 


Fel 


16 


5 


6 


i 


5 





35 


154.0 


98.0 




Mi 3 


>8 


1 


3 


', 


2 





37 


97.2 


68.0 


Dist Total3 


Fel 


195 


54 


48 


24 


48 


15 


384 


207.6 


90.0 


% of Total 




oo. ox 


14.1% 


12.5% 


6.3% 


12.5% 


3.9% 


100.0% 








•'.: 


170 


28 


22 


39 


40 


22 


321 


208.0 


84.0 


% of Total 




53.0% 


8.7% 


6.9% 


12.1% 


12.5% 


6.9% 


100.0% 







122 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 









Age 


i oi renain 


g ^ases u 


'ays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 10 






















Wake 


Fel 


750 


242 


265 


359 


205 


81 


1,902 


199.9 


117.0 


% of Total 




39.4% 


12.7% 


13.9% 


18.9% 


10.8% 


4.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


309 


40 


43 


92 


42 


9 


535 


138.1 


69.0 


% of Total 




57.8% 


7.5% 


8.0% 


17.2% 


7.9% 


1.7% 


100.0% 






District 11 






















Harnett 


Fel 


41 


2 


3 


4 


1 





51 


67.6 


29.0 




Mis 


7 


2 


1 


2 


1 





13 


126.6 


77.0 


Johnston 


Fel 


56 





5 











61 


45.4 


46.0 




Mis 


25 


1 





I 








27 


35.1 


20.0 


Lee 


Fel 


12 


5 





1 


5 





23 


131.8 


57.0 




Mis 


6 








1 








7 


55.0 


29.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


109 


7 


8 


5 


6 





135 


68.5 


40.0 


% of Total 




80.7% 


5.2% 


5.9% 


3.7% 


4.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


38 


3 


1 


4 


1 





47 


63.4 


33.0 


% of Total 




80.9% 


6.4% 


2.1% 


8.5% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 12 






















Cumberland 


Fel 


278 


107 


107 


92 


35 


4 


623 


132.7 


97.0 




Mis 


28 


16 


8 


8 


1 


1 


62 


126.2 


95.0 


Hoke 


Fel 


6 


16 


9 


3 


2 





36 


131.4 


106.0 




Mis 


1 


2 


4 


2 


5 





14 


317.0 


156.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


284 


123 


116 


95 


37 


4 


659 


132.6 


97.0 


% of Total 




43.1% 


18.7% 


17.6% 


14.4% 


5.6% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


29 


18 


12 


10 


6 


1 


76 


161.3 


104.5 


% of Total 




38.2% 


23.7% 


15.8% 


13.2% 


7.9% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






District 13 






















Bladen 


Fel 


9 


7 


7 


13 


3 


3 


42 


252.8 


146.0 




Mis 


14 


9 


3 


4 


1 





31 


105.9 


95.0 


Brunswick 


Fel 


218 


10 


19 


77 


14 


4 


342 


124.8 


46.0 




Mis 


16 





2 


19 


2 





39 


188.4 


218.0 


Columbus 


Fel 


37 


10 


13 


43 


3 


6 


112 


223.1 


127.0 




Mis 


43 


10 


17 


33 


1 


3 


107 


160.8 


127.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


264 


27 


39 


133 


20 


13 


496 


157.8 


78.0 


% of Total 




53.2% 


5.4% 


7.9% 


26.8% 


4.0% 


2.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


73 


19 


22 


56 


4 


3 


177 


157.3 


112.0 


% of Total 




41.2% 


10.7% 


12.4% 


31.6% 


2.3% 


1.7% 


100.0% 






District 14 






















Durham 


Fel 


349 


86 


75 


143 


78 


34 


765 


199.2 


104.0 


% of Total 




45.6% 


11.2% 


9.8% 


18.7% 


10.2% 


4.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


100 


8 


19 


30 


64 


39 


260 


358.7 


209.0 


% of Total 




38.5% 


3.1% 


7.3% 


11.5% 


24.6% 


15.0% 


100.0% 






District 15A 






















Alamance 


Fel 


183 


64 


25 


35 


3 


1 


311 


92.9 


83.0 


% of Total 




58.8% 


20.6% 


8.0% 


11.3% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


88 


10 


23 


28 


6 





155 


118.1 


83.0 


% of Total 




56.8% 


6.5% 


14.8% 


18.1% 


3.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 15B 






















Chatham 


Fel 


33 


15 


2 


10 


5 





65 


139.0 


84.0 




Mis 


36 


3 


3 


4 








46 


60.2 


21.0 


Orange 


Fel 


100 


27 


33 


26 





1 


187 


112.2 


89.0 




Mis 


26 


3 





1 








30 


67.1 


50.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


133 


42 


35 


36 


5 


1 


252 


119.1 


89.0 


% of Total 




52.8% 


16.7% 


13.9% 


14.3% 


2.0% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


62 


6 


3 


5 








76 


62.9 


46.0 


% of Total 




81.6% 


7.9% 


3.9% 


6.6% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







123 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 









Age: 


; ol Kendin 


g cases (i 


lays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 16 






















Robeson 


Fel 


217 


66 


37 


15 


11 


2 


348 


99.4 


70.0 




Mis 


123 


21 


18 


20 


10 


5 


197 


120.4 


61.0 


Scotland 


Fel 


84 


19 


22 


24 


5 


5 


159 


131.6 


75.0 




Mis 


40 


5 


11 


22 


32 


40 


150 


386.2 


328.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


301 


85 


59 


39 


16 


7 


507 


109.5 


75.0 


J of Total 




59.4% 


16.8% 


11.6% 


7.7% 


3.2% 


1.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


163 


26 


29 


42 


42 


45 


347 


235.3 


102.0 


% of Total 




47. 01 


7.5% 


8.4% 


12.1% 


12.1% 


13.0% 


100.0% 






District 17A 






















Caswell 


Fel 


2 


1 


3 


1 


1 





8 


168.5 


141.0 




Mis 


30 





14 





1 





45 


79.1 


48.0 


Rockingham 


Fel 


102 


212 


24 


17 


1 





356 


98.6 


111.0 




Mis 


130 


37 


38 


23 


5 





233 


98.8 


83.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


104 


213 


27 


18 


2 





364 


100.1 


111.0 


% of Total 




28. 6% 


58.5% 


7.4% 


4.9% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


160 


37 


52 


23 


6 





278 


95.6 


76.0 


% of Total 




57. 6% 


13.3% 


18.7% 


8.3% 


2.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 17B 






















Stokes 


Fel 


41 


5 


4 


3 








53 


60.1 


50.0 




Mis 


25 


2 


1 


3 








31 


62.3 


34.0 


Surry 


Fel 


21 


6 


4 








4 


43 


235.2 


75.0 




Mis 


64 


13 


7 


3 








87 


64.9 


42.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


70 


11 


8 


3 





4 


96 


138.6 


55.0 


% of Total 




72.9% 


11.5% 


8.3% 


3.1% 


0.0% 


4.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


89 


15 


8 


6 








118 


64.2 


40.0 


% of Total 




75.4% 


12.7% 


6.8% 


5.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18 






















Guilford 


Fel 


688 


218 


267 


457 


172 


70 


1,872 


200.5 


132.0 


% of Total 




36.8% 


11.6% 


14.3% 


24.4% 


9.2% 


3.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


90 


13 


86 


60 


31 


10 


290 


206.5 


147.0 


% of Total 




31.0% 


4.5% 


29.7% 


20.7% 


10.7% 


3.4% 


100.0% 






District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


Fel 


194 


159 


23 


15 


5 





396 


88.4 


95.0 




Mis 


131 


39 


54 


35 


6 





265 


112.3 


95.0 


Rowan 


Fel 


151 


74 


22 


30 


11 





291 


104.2 


77.0 




Mis 


116 


8 


8 


32 


25 





189 


139.4 


55.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


343 


233 


45 


45 


16 





687 


95.1 


90.0 


% of Total 




50.7% 


33.9% 


6.6% 


6.6% 


2.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


247 


47 


62 


67 


31 





454 


123.6 


78.0 


% of Total 




54.4% 


10.4% 


13.7% 


14.8% 


6.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 19B 






















Montgomery 


Fel 


26 





14 


18 


11 


2 


71 


196.8 


147.0 




Mis 


46 


11 


5 


31 


32 





125 


205.6 


193.0 


? a r, d o 1 p h 


Fel 


372 


52 


17 


61 


24 


3 


529 


121.9 


78.0 




Mis 


147 


33 


59 


72 


13 





324 


131.9 


108.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


398 


52 


31 


79 


35 


5 


600 


130.8 


78.0 


% of Total 




66.3% 


8.7% 


5.2% 


13.2% 


5.8% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mi3 


193 


44 


64 


103 


45 





449 


152.4 


113.0 


% of Total 




43.0% 


9.8% 


14.3% 


22.9% 


10.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







124 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 









Age. 


i of Pendin 


g Cases (L 


•ays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 20 






















Anson 


Fel 


18 


2 


2 


5 








27 


86.9 


60.0 




Mis 


36 


8 


8 


15 


5 





72 


129.6 


80.0 


Moore 


Fel 


97 


21 


44 


20 


1 





183 


108.9 


90.0 




Mis 


51 


6 


23 


15 


5 


1 


101 


135.8 


90.0 


Richmond 


Fel 


71 


12 


15 


6 


2 





106 


77.9 


62.0 




Mis 


70 


3 


13 


8 








94 


79.5 


45.5 


Stanly 


Fel 


34 


10 


3 


6 


1 





54 


114.2 


88.0 




Mis 


26 


6 


8 


11 


1 





52 


121.7 


90.0 


Union 


Fel 


84 


10 


31 


20 


9 


10 


164 


197.1 


81.0 




Mis 


66 


14 


38 


14 


31 


19 


182 


276.2 


130.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


304 


55 


95 


57 


13 


10 


534 


129.3 


83.0 


% of Total 




56.9% 


10.3% 


17.8% 


10.7% 


2.4% 


1.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


249 


37 


90 


63 


42 


20 


501 


173.9 


92.0 


% of Total 




49.7% 


7.4% 


18.0% 


12.6% 


8.4% 


4.0% 


100.0% 






District 21 






















Forsyth 


Fel 


506 


161 


90 


54 


6 





817 


81.8 


67.0 


% of Total 




61.9% 


19.7% 


11.0% 


6.6% 


0.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


183 


29 


33 


79 


3 





327 


113.0 


67.0 


% of Total 




56.0% 


8.9% 


10.1% 


24.2% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 22 






















Alexander 


Fel 


22 





5 


3 








30 


64.3 


13.0 




Mis 


18 


2 


1 


5 








26 


75.5 


14.0 


Davidson 


Fel 


142 


35 


19 


22 


8 


2 


228 


109.5 


69.0 




Mis 


68 


7 


4 


13 


2 





94 


82.2 


47.0 


Davie 


Fel 


15 


1 














16 


41.0 


43.0 




Mis 


22 


4 





3 








29 


61.7 


22.0 


Iredell 


Fel 


60 


34 


10 


46 








150 


117.3 


111.0 




Mis 


90 


10 


7 


13 


2 





122 


74.1 


37.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


239 


70 


34 


71 


8 


2 


424 


106.5 


69.0 


% of Total 




56.4% 


16.5% 


8.0% 


16.7% 


1.9% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


198 


23 


12 


34 


4 





271 


75.7 


34.0 


% of Total 




73.1% 


8.5% 


4.4% 


12.5% 


1.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 23 






















Alleghany 


Fel 


5 








8 


1 


1 


15 


253.1 


264.0 




Mis 


10 





2 


8 


6 





26 


215.0 


208.0 


Ashe 


Fel 


20 


9 


13 


16 


12 


3 


73 


232.3 


131.0 




Mis 


11 


13 


4 


12 


4 


1 


45 


188.7 


117.0 


Wilkes 


Fel 


64 


16 


21 


21 


9 


6 


137 


176.2 


118.0 




Mis 


74 


12 


16 


23 


14 


3 


142 


154.1 


69.0 


Yadkin 


Fel 


9 


4 





3 








16 


97.9 


55.0 




Mis 


4 

















4 


41.0 


41.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


98 


29 


34 


48 


22 


10 


241 


192.8 


118.0 


% of Total 




40.7% 


12.0% 


14.1% 


19.9% 


9.1% 


4.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


99 


25 


22 


43 


24 


4 


217 


166.5 


98.0 


% of Total 




45.6% 


11.5% 


10.1% 


19.8% 


11.1% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 24 






















Avery 


Fel 


21 


4 


1 


2 


3 





31 


134.1 


78.0 




Mis 


15 





4 


1 








20 


70.4 


48.0 


Madison 


Fel 


8 


3 


8 





5 





24 


177.4 


166.0 




Mis 


7 





1 


1 


1 





10 


113.4 


34.5 


Mitchell 


Fel 


46 


4 


6 


2 


4 





62 


103.8 


41.0 




Mis 


17 


2 





1 








20 


50.3 


25.0 


Watauga 


Fel 


74 


43 


57 


13 


10 


2 


199 


122.3 


92.0 




Mis 


7 


9 


7 


22 








45 


188.2 


168.0 


Yancey 


Fel 


2 


2 





8 


19 





31 


353.0 


369.0 




Mis 


3 





5 


13 


5 





26 


257.5 


269.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


151 


56 


72 


25 


41 


2 


347 


144.5 


92.0 


% of Total 




43.5% 


16.1% 


20.7% 


7.2% 


11.8% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


49 


11 


17 


38 


6 





121 


154.6 


139.0 


% of Total 




40.5% 


9.1% 


14.0% 


31.4% 


5.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







125 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 









Age; 


; or Fendin 


g Lases (L 


•ays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 25 






















Burke 


Fel 


93 


49 


53 


74 


24 


29 


327 


237.4 


133.0 




Mis 


118 


39 


53 


76 


19 


18 


323 


210.5 


124.0 


Caldwell 


Fel 


102 


20 


28 


32 


12 


3 


197 


139.5 


85.0 




Mis 


105 


21 


41 


29 


20 





216 


133.8 


96.0 


Catawba 


Fel 


309 


103 


211 


214 


55 


2 


894 


155.3 


127.0 




Mis 


105 


45 


71 


113 


57 


4 


395 


201.6 


148.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


509 


172 


292 


320 


91 


34 


1,418 


172.0 


126.0 


% of Total 




35.9% 


12.1% 


20.6% 


22.6% 


6.4% 


2.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


328 


105 


165 


218 


96 


22 


934 


189.0 


126.0 


% of Total 




35.1% 


11.2% 


17.7% 


23.3% 


10.3% 


2.4% 


100.0% 






District 26 






















Mecklenburg 


Fel 


637 


141 


90 


114 


59 


12 


1,053 


120.3 


63.0 


% of Total 




60.5% 


13.4% 


8.5% 


10.8% 


5.6% 


1.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


286 


56 


50 


103 


42 


3 


540 


139.9 


85.0 


% of Total 




53.0% 


10.4% 


9.3% 


19.1% 


7.8% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 27A 






















Gaston 


Fel 


291 


19 


7 


2 


1 


2 


322 


67.4 


56.0 


% of Total 




90.4% 


5.9% 


2.2% 


0.6% 


0.3% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


mo 


34 


23 


13 


12 


4 


226 


119.3 


66.0 


% of Total 




61.9% 


15.0% 


10.2% 


5.8% 


5.3% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 27B 






















Cleveland 


Fel 


42 


13 


14 


59 


17 


2 


147 


193.2 


196.0 




Mis 


52 


3 


5 


9 


2 


1 


77 


103.0 


49.0 


Lincoln 


Fel 


c >b 


1 


10 


7 


8 


4 


85 


161.6 


76.0 




Mis 


20 


2 


3 


7 


7 


1 


40 


202.6 


91.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


97 


14 


24 


66 


25 


6 


232 


181.6 


133.0 


% of Total 




41.8% 


6.0% 


10.3% 


28.4% 


10.8% 


2.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


72 


10 


8 


16 


9 


2 


117 


137.0 


76.0 


1 of Total 




61.5% 


8.5% 


6.8% 


13.7% 


7.7% 


1.7% 


100.0% 






District 28 






















Buncombe 


Fel 


195 


16 


22 


41 


12 





286 


97.2 


62.0 


% of Total 




68.2% 


5.6% 


7.7% 


14.3% 


4.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


106 


8 


5 


5 








124 


43.3 


11.5 


% of Total 




85.5% 


6.5% 


4.0% 


4.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 






















Henderson 


Fel 


42 


8 


1 


39 


2 





92 


136.9 


99.0 




Mis 


l»1 


7 


5 


16 


1 





70 


114.8 


59.5 


"c Dowel 1 


Fel 


4 


28 


8 


15 


4 


5 


100 


155.9 


103.0 




Mis 


27 


6 


5 


9 


6 


1 


54 


166.3 


89.5 


Polk 


Fel 


7 





14 


2 


4 


3 


30 


257.8 


165.0 




Mis 


6 


3 


3 


3 


3 





18 


176.8 


132.5 


Rutherford 


Fel 


69 


46 


12 


29 


17 





173 


150.7 


91.0 




Mis 


59 


10 


16 


18 


15 


3 


121 


179.3 


91.0 


Transylvania 


Fel 


56 


2 


2 


4 


10 


13 


87 


292.6 


35.0 




Mis 


15 








2 


1 


4 


22 


265.8 


37.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


214 


84 


37 


89 


37 


21 


482 


181.4 


91.0 


J of Total 




44.4% 


17.4% 


7.7% 


18.5% 


7.7% 


4.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


148 


26 


29 


48 


26 


8 


285 


167.5 


85.0 


% of Total 




51.9% 


9.1% 


10.2% 


16.8% 


9.1% 


2.8% 


100.0% 







1 26 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 











Age 


s or Pendir 


g Lases (L 


lays) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 30 






















Cherokee 


Fel 


8 





4 


6 


39 


37 


94 


573.0 


492.5 






Mis 


1 


4 


3 


3 


31 


26 


68 


642.5 


614.0 


Clay 




Fel 











2 


1 


4 


7 


723.8 


1,028.0 






Mis 


3 


5 





2 





1 


11 


180.9 


92.0 


Graham 




Fel 


41 

















41 


30.2 


29.0 






Mis 


9 








5 


6 





20 


235.0 


249.0 


Haywood 




Fel 


65 


4 


2 


16 


1 


11 


99 


228.8 


64.0 






Mis 


20 


4 





5 


2 





31 


119.7 


62.0 


Jackson 




Fel 


52 





11 


8 


5 





76 


92.1 


29.0 






Mis 


8 


2 


1 


6 


1 





18 


134.0 


120.0 


Macon 




Fel 


26 


3 


11 


18 


3 


2 


63 


217.2 


148.0 






Mis 


8 














5 


13 


424.8 


27.0 


Swain 




Fel 


33 


5 


11 


1 


7 





57 


113.0 


47.0 






Mis 


H 


3 


5 


1 








13 


120.6 


110.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


225 


12 


39 


51 


56 


54 


437 


251.6 


68.0 


% of 


Total 




51.5% 


2.7% 


8.9% 


11.7% 


12.8% 


12.4% 


100.0% 










Mis 


53 


18 


9 


22 


40 


32 


174 


365.5 


252.5 


% of 


Total 




30. 5% 


10.3% 


5.2% 


12.6% 


23.0% 


18.4% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


Fel 


9,342 


2,645 


2,320 


2,641 


1,083 


411 


18,442 


146.0 


88.0 


% of 


Total 




50. 7% 


14.3% 


12.6% 


14.3% 


5.9% 


2.2% 


100.0% 










Mis 


4,768 


874 


1,096 


1,514 


653 


228 


9,133 


151.4 


83.0 


% of 


Total 




52. 2% 


9.6% 


12.0% 


16.6% 


7.1% 


2.5% 


100.0% 







127 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Ages 


or Disposi 


■d Cases (I 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 1 






















Camden 


Fel 


4 


5 


6 


2 








17 


112.4 


112.0 




Mis 


13 


8 


3 


16 


1 





46 


144.1 


110.0 


Chowan 


Fel 


53 


5 


9 


6 


1 





74 


74.1 


63.0 




Mis 


143 


17 


18 


9 


2 


1 


190 


60.2 


34.0 


Currituck 


Fel 


13 


3 


14 


2 


2 





39 


115.8 


105.0 




Mis 


61 


11 


6 


10 


1 





89 


95.6 


73.0 


Dare 


Fel 


168 


24 


33 


47 


14 





286 


112.0 


72.0 




Mis 


205 


33 


48 


34 


9 


4 


333 


107.6 


70.0 


Gates 


Fel 


13 


5 


10 


2 


2 


1 


33 


150.9 


102.0 




Mis 


141 


16 


17 


13 


3 





90 


113.9 


95.0 


Pasquotank 


Fel 


99 


36 


38 


18 


9 





200 


114.1 


91.0 




Mis 


445 


76 


50 


58 


4 





633 


69.4 


53.0 


Perquimans 


Fel 


20 


4 


1 


6 








31 


95.2 


68.0 




Mis 


80 


17 


13 


15 


6 





131 


110.4 


89.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


375 


82 


111 


83 


28 


1 


680 


109.8 


83.0 


% of Total 




55.1% 


12.1% 


16.3% 


12.2% 


4.1% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


993 


178 


155 


155 


26 


5 


1,512 


86.6 


63.0 


% of Total 




65. 7% 


11.8% 


10.3% 


10.3% 


1.7% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 2 






















Beaufort 


Fel 


390 


21 


84 


36 


11 


2 


544 


88.3 


57.0 




Mis 


164 


48 


43 


16 


4 





275 


91.2 


74.0 


Hyde 


Fel 


19 


6 


7 


7 


5 


12 


56 


380.2 


138.5 




Mis 


16 


4 


3 


11 





2 


36 


238.0 


106.5 


Martin 


Fel 


95 


13 


14 


6 


2 





130 


72.8 


55.0 




Mis 


35 


11 


18 


13 


3 





80 


126.0 


103.0 


Tyrrell 


Fel 


5 


9 


8 


7 








29 


154.8 


140.0 




Mis 


12 


6 


4 


4 


1 





27 


119.6 


112.0 


Washington 


Fel 


37 


8 


10 


7 


1 





63 


106.0 


86.0 




Mis 


35 


13 


5 


9 


3 





65 


114.2 


86.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


546 


57 


123 


63 


19 


14 


822 


109.4 


64.0 


% of Total 




66.4% 


6.9% 


15.0% 


7.7% 


2.3% 


1.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


262 


82 


73 


53 


11 


2 


483 


112.5 


82.0 


i of Total 




54.2% 


17.0% 


15.1% 


11.0% 


2.3% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 3 






















Carteret 


Fel 


89 


27 


46 


38 


8 





208 


132.6 


112.0 




Mis 


89 


11 


32 


i2 


10 





174 


123.6 


87.0 


Craven 


Fel 


240 


51 


74 


59 


30 


4 


458 


122.1 


84.0 




Mis 


229 


36 


109 


23 


1 





398 


83.0 


64.0 


Pamlico 


Fel 


15 


37 


5 


5 


3 





65 


116.2 


106.0 




Mis 


12 


3 


3 


6 








24 


112.8 


84.0 


Pitt 


Fel 


758 


137 


148 


115 


11 





1,169 


90.6 


65.0 




Mis 


857 


106 


87 


74 


9 





1,133 


74.2 


62.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


1,102 


252 


273 


217 


52 


4 


1,900 


103.6 


76.0 


% of Total 




58.0% 


13.3% 


14.4% 


11.4% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,187 


156 


231 


135 


20 





1,729 


81.7 


62.0 


% of Total 




68.7% 


9.0% 


13.4% 


7.8% 


1.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 4 






















Duplin 


Fel 


463 


26 


13 


3 








505 


31.0 


19.0 




Mis 


52 


1 


3 











56 


33.3 


20.0 


; o '. <-, -, 


Fel 


52 


3 


2 





2 





59 


41.8 


18.0 




Mis 


8 








1 








9 


66.8 


57.0 


0n3low 


Fel 


1,113 


98 


77 


40 








1,328 


50.1 


35.0 




Mis 


293 


?'i 


14 


1 








337 


43.4 


36.0 


Sampson 


Fel 


300 


10 


14 


2 








386 


32.2 


21.0 




Mis 


59 





2 


6 








67 


45.6 


20.0 


Di3t Total3 


Fel 


1,988 


137 


106 


45 


2 





2,278 


42.6 


28.0 


I of Total 




87.3% 


6.0% 


4.7% 


2.0% 


0.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


412 


30 


19 


8 








469 


42.9 


29.0 


% of Total 




87.3% 


6.4% 


4.1% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







1 28 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Ages 


of Dispose 


d Cases (1 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 5 






















New Hanover 


Fel 


1,086 


308 


265 


292 


26 


6 


1,983 


107.4 


81.0 




Mis 


552 


94 


92 


101 


9 


3 


851 


94.0 


69.0 


Pender 


Fel 


121 


501 


37 


11 





3 


673 


93.2 


92.0 




Mis 


39 


2 


7 


4 


4 





56 


102.3 


67.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


1,207 


809 


302 


303 


26 


9 


2,656 


103.7 


92.0 


% of Total 




45. H% 


30.5% 


11.4% 


11.4% 


1.0% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


591 


96 


99 


105 


13 


3 


907 


94.5 


68.0 


% of Total 




65.2% 


10.6% 


10.9% 


11.6% 


1.4% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 6 






















Bertie 


Fel 


67 


25 


1 


7 


1 





101 


76.4 


57.0 




Mis 


45 


13 


5 


21 


1 





85 


103.5 


70.0 


Halifax 


Fel 


213 


35 


22 


52 


12 


1 


335 


108.1 


49.0 




Mis 


231 


22 


41 


51 


17 


4 


366 


110.4 


59.5 


Hertford 


Fel 


150 


15 


14 


9 


4 





192 


68.7 


44.0 




Mis 


81 


7 


15 


12 


6 





121 


100.3 


56.0 


Northampton 


Fel 


43 


21 


14 


33 


7 


1 


119 


149.4 


105.0 




Mis 


38 


8 


8 


20 


8 





82 


153.5 


102.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


473 


96 


51 


101 


24 


2 


747 


100.2 


57.0 


% of Total 




63.3% 


0.0% 


6.8% 


13.5% 


3.2% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


395 


50 


69 


104 


32 


4 


654 


113.0 


65.0 


% of Total 




60.4% 


7.6% 


10.6% 


15.9% 


4.9% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 7 






















Edgecombe 


Fel 


239 


8 


20 


20 


1 





288 


65.7 


45.0 




Mis 


130 


12 


24 


8 


2 


2 


178 


81.6 


62.0 


Nash 


Fel 


408 


214 


40 


44 


2 





708 


77.9 


71.0 




Mis 


160 


32 


20 


6 


2 


3 


223 


79.4 


50.0 


Wilson 


Fel 


253 


16 


51 


22 


4 





346 


69.5 


45.0 




Mis 


155 


14 


16 


14 


8 





207 


84.4 


52.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


900 


238 


111 


86 


7 





1,342 


73.1 


51.0 


% of Total 




67.1? 


17.7% 


8.3% 


6.4% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


445 


58 


60 


28 


12 


5 


608 


81.7 


52.0 


% of Total 




73.25 


9.5% 


9.9% 


4.6% 


2.0% 


0.8% 


100.0% 






District 8 






















Greene 


Fel 


44 


9 


10 


11 


10 





84 


124.4 


77.0 




Mis 


41 


13 


18 


17 


2 





91 


119.1 


101 .0 


Lenoir 


Fel 


207 


41 


45 


23 


6 





322 


82.8 


63.0 




Mis 


256 


69 


85 


53 








463 


90.9 


79.0 


Wayne 


Fel 


261 


98 


117 


74 


2 





552 


107.7 


92.0 




Mis 


498 


86 


110 


57 


8 





759 


74.5 


62.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


512 


148 


172 


108 


18 





958 


100.8 


80.0 


% of Total 




53.4% 


15.4% 


18.0% 


11.3% 


1.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


795 


168 


213 


127 


10 





1,313 


83.3 


69.0 


% of Total 




60.5% 


12.8% 


16.2% 


9.7% 


0.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 9 






















Franklin 


Fel 


85 


21 


20 


23 


4 





153 


105.4 


78.0 




Mis 


56 


14 


18 


24 


2 


2 


116 


129.9 


91.5 


Granville 


Fel 


120 


64 


29 


35 


16 


20 


284 


235.9 


106.0 




Mis 


107 


33 


22 


36 


34 


2 


234 


176.7 


99.0 


Person 


Fel 


62 


28 


48 


24 


2 


2 


166 


119.2 


113.0 




Mis 


91 


21 


36 


27 


5 


1 


181 


122.0 


89.0 


Vance 


Fel 


188 


50 


28 


74 


11 


1 


352 


115.9 


83.0 




Mis 


131 


64 


46 


67 


13 


1 


322 


133.9 


112.0 


Warren 


Fel 


25 


28 


21 


4 


7 





85 


133.0 


103.0 




Mis 


55 


26 


12 


17 


4 





114 


114.0 


91.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


480 


191 


146 


160 


40 


23 


1,040 


149.0 


99.0 


% of Total 




46.2% 


18.4% 


14.0% 


15.4% 


3.8% 


2.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


440 


158 


134 


171 


58 


6 


967 


139.2 


99.0 


% of Total 




45.5% 


16.3% 


13.9% 


17.7% 


6.0% 


0.6% 


100.0% 







129 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Ages 


oi Uisposi 


d Lases (1 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 10 






















Wake 


Fel 


929 


474 


692 


1,122 


476 


143 


3,836 


220.2 


164.0 


% of Total 




24. 2% 


12.4% 


18.0% 


29.2% 


12.4% 


3.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,01'! 


221 


192 


135 


56 


7 


1,625 


98.0 


63.0 


% of Total 




62. 4% 


13.6% 


11.8% 


8.3% 


3.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 11 






















Harnett 


Fel 


219 


17 


50 


8 





1 


295 


81.6 


63.0 




Mis 


63 


13 


11 


5 








92 


75.2 


64.5 


Johnston 


Fel 


188 


38 


35 


15 








276 


79.0 


62.0 




Mis 


19 ; J 


24 


14 


5 








237 


55.3 


45.0 


Lee 


Fel 


321 


41 


41 


56 








459 


86.5 


56.0 




Mis 


173 


18 


22 


23 


4 





240 


86.9 


56.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


728 


96 


126 


79 





1 


1,030 


83.1 


62.0 


% of Total 




70.71 


9.3% 


12.2% 


7.7% 


0.0% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


430 


55 


47 


33 


4 





569 


71.8 


54.0 


% of Total 




75.6% 


9.7% 


8.3% 


5.8% 


0.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 12 






















Cumberland 


Fel 


653 


162 


234 


232 


69 


6 


1,356 


124.1 


93.0 




Mis 


256 


32 


45 


31 


12 





376 


94.3 


76.0 


Hoke 


Fel 


96 


13 


10 


4 


1 





124 


49.5 


22.0 




Mis 


24 


4 


7 


3 








38 


89.1 


79.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


749 


175 


244 


236 


70 


6 


1,480 


117.8 


87.0 


% of Total 




50.6% 


11.8% 


16.5% 


15.9% 


4.7% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


280 


36 


52 


34 


12 





414 


93.8 


76.0 


% of Total 




67.6% 


8.7% 


12.6% 


8.2% 


2.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 13 






















Bladen 


Fel 


17 


50 


52 


51 


9 


2 


181 


194.2 


180.0 




Mis 


50 


18 


23 


30 


3 


2 


126 


141.7 


113.5 


Brunswick 


Fel 


124 


53 


72 


89 


15 


8 


361 


168.7 


124.0 




Mis 


46 


26 


40 


32 


2 





146 


138.7 


122.5 


Columbus 


Fel 


30 


15 


51 


108 


8 





212 


196.6 


194.5 




Mis 


106 


37 


81 


45 


2 





271 


126.9 


113.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


171 


118 


175 


248 


32 


10 


754 


182.6 


164.0 


% of Total 




22.7% 


15.6% 


23.2% 


32.9% 


4.2% 


1.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


202 


81 


144 


107 


7 


2 


543 


133.4 


114.0 


% of Total 




37.2% 


14.9% 


26.5% 


19.7% 


1.3% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 14 






















Durham 


Fel 


728 


215 


238 


285 


68 


7 


1,541 


123.8 


97.0 


% of Total 




47.2% 


14.0% 


15.4% 


18.5% 


4.4% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


152 


31 


59 


45 


18 


7 


312 


147.3 


92.0 


% of Total 




48.7% 


9.9% 


18.9% 


14.4% 


5.8% 


2.2% 


100.0% 






District 15A 






















- . a-iar.ce 


Fel 


550 


174 


241 


155 


21 





1,141 


110.0 


98.0 


% of Total 




48.2% 


15.2% 


21.1% 


13.6% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


400 


127 


81 


83 


12 


4 


707 


104.3 


78.0 


% of Total 




56.6% 


18.0% 


1 1.5% 


11.7% 


1.7% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 15B 






















Chatham 


Fel 


62 


7 


24 


17 


13 


1 


124 


145.2 


91.5 




Mis 


34 


9 


1 1 


14 


1 





69 


113.8 


93.0 


Orange 


Fel 


250 


61 


86 


60 


5 





462 


97.6 


74.0 




Mi 3 


39 


8 


17 


4 


1 





69 


93.3 


68.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


312 


68 


110 


77 


18 


1 


586 


107.6 


82.0 


% of Total 




53.2% 


11.6% 


18.8% 


13-1% 


3.1% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mi 3 


73 


17 


28 


18 


2 





138 


103.5 


79.0 


J of Total 




52.9% 


12.3% 


20.3% 


13.0% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







130 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Ages 


of Dispost 


d Cases (I 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 16 






















Robeson 


Fel 


583 


251 


188 


140 


28 


2 


1,192 


108.8 


92.0 




Mis 


424 


106 


121 


97 


50 


1 


799 


117.1 


83.0 


Scotland 


Fel 


156 


44 


92 


83 


11 


4 


390 


138.0 


118.0 




Mis 


91 


27 


69 


76 


50 


5 


318 


207.0 


159.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


739 


295 


280 


223 


39 


6 


1,582 


116.0 


92.0 


% of Total 




46.7$ 


18.6% 


17.7% 


14.1% 


2.5% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


515 


133 


190 


173 


100 


6 


1,117 


142.7 


102.0 


% of Total 




46.1% 


11.9% 


17.0% 


15.5% 


9.0% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 17A 






















Caswell 


Fel 


70 


7 


4 


3 








84 


42.6 


23.0 




Mis 


145 


11 





4 








160 


48.1 


46.5 


Rockingham 


Fel 


604 


103 


74 


29 


3 





813 


66.4 


57.0 




Mis 


511 


69 


74 


32 


5 





691 


67.8 


55.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


674 


110 


78 


32 


3 





897 


64.1 


52.0 


% of Total 




75.15 


12.3% 


8.7% 


3.6% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


656 


80 


74 


36 


5 





851 


64.1 


55.0 


% of Total 




77. 1% 


9.4% 


8.7% 


4.2% 


0.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 17B 






















Stokes 


Fel 


176 


38 


18 


36 


2 





270 


81.6 


50.0 




Mis 


107 


30 


21 


38 


3 





199 


102.5 


85.0 


Surry 


Fel 


408 


110 


21 


7 


2 





548 


70.1 


69.0 




Mis 


437 


72 


42 


27 


2 





580 


72.4 


67.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


584 


148 


39 


43 


4 





818 


73.9 


63.0 


% of Total 




71.4% 


18.1% 


4.8% 


5.3% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


544 


102 


63 


65 


5 





779 


80.0 


68.0 


% of Total 




69.8% 


13.1% 


8.1% 


8.3% 


0.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18 






















Guilford 


Fel 


1,603 


466 


687 


655 


159 


256 


3,826 


198.0 


109.0 


% of Total 




41.9% 


12.2% 


18.0% 


17.1% 


4.2% 


6.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


590 


64 


92 


127 


32 


48 


953 


158.2 


69.0 


% of Total 




61.9% 


6.7% 


9.7% 


13.3% 


3.4% 


5.0% 


100.0% 






District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


Fel 


569 


147 


136 


83 


4 


18 


957 


105.1 


81.0 




Mis 


271 


158 


99 


51 


12 


2 


593 


11 1.7 


96.0 


Rowan 


Fel 


489 


131 


56 


55 


16 


2 


749 


99.1 


81.0 




Mis 


316 


63 


81 


68 


9 


3 


540 


104.7 


74.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


1,058 


278 


192 


138 


20 


20 


1,706 


102.4 


81.0 


% of Total 




62.0% 


16.3% 


11.3% 


8.1% 


1.2% 


1.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


587 


221 


180 


119 


21 


5 


1,133 


108.3 


86.0 


% of Total 




51.8% 


19.5% 


15.9% 


10.5% 


1.9% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 19B 






















Montgomery 


Fel 


68 


221 


113 


60 


36 


5 


503 


162.2 


105.0 




Mis 


190 


79 


102 


91 


45 


15 


522 


178.8 


117.0 


Randolph 


Fel 


168 


103 


93 


154 


32 


5 


555 


173.7 


124.0 




Mis 


487 


96 


192 


181 


38 


5 


999 


127.0 


92.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


236 


324 


206 


214 


68 


10 


1,058 


168.2 


113.0 


% of Total 




22.3% 


30.6% 


19.5% 


20.2% 


6.4% 


0.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


677 


175 


294 


272 


83 


20 


1,521 


144.7 


100.0 


% of Total 




44.5% 


11.5% 


19.3% 


17.9% 


5.5% 


1.3% 


100.0% 







131 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Ages 


or Dispose 


d (Jases (1 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




- o 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 20 






















Anson 


Fel 


99 


29 


45 


48 


6 





227 


119.6 


105.0 




Mis 


252 


32 


50 


46 


7 





387 


89.4 


56.0 


Moore 


Fel 


338 


113 


90 


52 


3 





596 


89.9 


77.0 




Mis 


331 


47 


32 


30 


7 





497 


76.6 


60.0 


Richmond 


Fel 


300 


25 


47 


47 


17 





436 


95.3 


46.5 




Mis 


317 


27 


59 


65 


15 


6 


489 


105.3 


59.0 


Stanly 


Fel 


151 


33 


15 


44 


8 





251 


107.9 


77.0 




Mis 


247 


40 


35 


45 


2 





369 


85.7 


62.0 


Union 


Fel 


277 


43 


48 


84 


9 





461 


103.7 


67.0 




Mis 


253 


55 


47 


40 


11 





406 


93.7 


62.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


1 ,165 


243 


245 


275 


43 





1,971 


100.0 


70.0 


I of Total 




59.1% 


12.3% 


12.4% 


14.0% 


2.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,450 


201 


223 


226 


42 


6 


2,148 


90.2 


60.0 


% of Total 




67.51 


9.4% 


10.4% 


10.5% 


2.0% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 21 






















Forsyth 


Fel 


1,051 


353 


230 


118 


12 


1 


1,765 


92.3 


79.0 


% of Total 




59. 5% 


20.0% 


13.0% 


6.7% 


0.7% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,580 


181 


104 


72 


7 





1,944 


60.9 


48.0 


% of Total 




81.3% 


9.3% 


5.3% 


3.7% 


0.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 22 






















Alexander 


Fel 


21 


29 


9 


19 


4 





82 


137.8 


106.0 




Mis 


97 


36 


30 


23 


3 





189 


99.2 


69.0 


Davidson 


Fel 


346 


43 


53 


70 


4 


7 


523 


106.1 


56.0 




Mis 


508 


47 


59 


53 


5 





672 


70.3 


41.5 


Davie 


Fel 


30 


9 


7 


4 








50 


72.2 


63.0 




Mis 


89 


18 


15 


17 


3 





142 


94.5 


63.0 


Iredell 


Fel 


163 


40 


39 


83 


2i 


7 


355 


153.9 


96.0 




Mis 


559 


81 


41 


57 


12 





750 


73.5 


45.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


560 


121 


108 


176 


31 


14 


1,010 


123.7 


69.4 


I of Total 




55.4% 


12.0% 


10.7% 


17.4% 


3.1% 


1.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,253 


182 


145 


150 


23 





1,753 


76.7 


47.0 


% of Total 




71.5% 


10.4% 


8.3% 


8.6% 


1.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 23 






















Alleghany 


Fel 


5 


1 





8 


3 


1 


18 


258.9 


216.5 




Mis 


6 


8 


1 


11 


2 





28 


181.6 


125.5 


Ashe 


Fel 


19 





12 


25 


3 





59 


159.8 


172.0 




Mis 


10 


6 


9 


13 


1 





39 


160.3 


139.0 


Wilkes 


Fel 


69 


Vj 


26 


57 


28 


2 


197 


209.5 


148.0 




Mis 


138 


36 


28 


59 


19 


2 


282 


142.0 


95.0 


Yadkin 


Fel 


53 


1 1 


31 


15 


2 





112 


118.3 


98.0 




Mis 


62 


•) 


16 


16 


7 


2 


112 


135.3 


73.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


146 


27 


69 


105 


36 


3 


386 


177.7 


140.0 


% of Total 




37.8% 


7.0% 


17.9% 


27.2% 


9.3% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


216 


59 


54 


99 


29 


4 


461 


144.3 


97.0 


% of Total 




46.9% 


12.8% 


11.7% 


21.5% 


6.3% 


0.9% 


100.0% 






District 24 






















Avery 


Fel 


10 


1 


1 


4 








16 


98.8 


44.5 




Mis 


9 


1 














10 


39.9 


39.0 


"■■}">-. -on 


Fel 


19 


3 


ll 


56 


14 


1 


104 


254.7 


283.0 




Mis 


2 


3 


4 


14 


1 


1 


25 


280.7 


246.0 


Mitchell 


Fel 


26 


9 


13 


4 4 


6 





98 


193.6 


221.5 




".-. 


2'j 


i 





7 








28 


108.2 


68.0 


Watauga 


Fel 


81 


5 


21 


51 


15 





173 


151.1 


122.0 




Mis 


36 


4 


12 


17 


1 





70 


105.2 


69.5 


Yancey 


Fel 


7 





7 


5 


1 


8 


28 


373.6 


188.5 




Mis 


1 


4 


3 


l 








9 


118.1 


115.0 


Di3t Total3 


Fel 


143 


18 


53 


160 


36 


9 


419 


199.6 


175.0 


% of Total 




3^.1% 


4.3% 


12.6% 


38.2% 


8.6% 


2.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


68 


13 


19 


39 


2 


1 


142 


132.8 


97.0 


J of Total 




47.9% 


9.2% 


13.4% 


27.5% 


1.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 







132 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 









Ages 


or Dispos( 


d Lases (I 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 25 






















Burke 


Fel 


168 


70 


127 


102 


52 


15 


534 


183.1 


134.0 




Mis 


355 


34 


122 


174 


40 


7 


732 


132.2 


106.5 


Caldwell 


Fel 


116 


122 


111 


60 


31 


5 


445 


164.1 


120.0 




Mis 


251 


64 


82 


91 


15 





503 


110.6 


92.0 


Catawba 


Fel 


191 


93 


192 


173 


77 


3 


729 


169.3 


139.0 




Mis 


277 


131 


120 


120 


60 


8 


716 


159.9 


108.5 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


475 


285 


430 


335 


160 


23 


1,708 


172.2 


130.0 


% of Total 




27.8% 


16.7% 


25.2% 


19.6% 


9.4% 


1.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


883 


229 


324 


385 


115 


15 


1,951 


136.7 


103.0 


% of Total 




45.3% 


11.7% 


16.6% 


19.7% 


5.9% 


0.8% 


100.0% 






District 26 






















Mecklenburg 


Fel 


1,312 


553 


753 


745 


183 


21 


3,567 


146.6 


118.0 


% of Total 




36.8% 


15.5% 


21.1% 


20.9% 


5.1% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


734 


188 


327 


386 


68 


6 


1.709 


136.3 


110.0 


% of Total 




42.9% 


11.0% 


19.1% 


22.6% 


4.0% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 27A 






















Gaston 


Fel 


973 


164 


146 


76 


13 


3 


1,375 


74.5 


55.0 


% of Total 




70.8% 


11.9% 


10.6% 


5.5% 


0.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


563 


101 


77 


80 


24 


21 


866 


120.0 


68.0 


% of Total 




65.0% 


11.7% 


8.9% 


9.2% 


2.8% 


2.4% 


100.0% 






District 27B 






















Cleveland 


Fel 


283 


133 


71 


149 


11 


2 


649 


122.6 


94.0 




Mis 


177 


41 


79 


75 


10 





382 


122.3 


98.5 


Lincoln 


Fel 


264 


66 


38 


66 





1 


435 


104.6 


77.0 




Mis 


80 


36 


25 


32 





1 


174 


118.2 


92.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


547 


199 


109 


215 


11 


3 


1,084 


115.3 


90.0 


% of Total 




50.5% 


18.4% 


10.1% 


19.8% 


1.0% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


257 


77 


104 


107 


10 


1 


556 


121.0 


97.0 


% of Total 




46.2% 


13.8% 


18.7% 


19.2% 


1.8% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 28 






















Buncombe 


Fel 


494 


193 


258 


73 


15 


16 


1,049 


117.4 


96.0 


% of Total 




47.1% 


18.4% 


24.6% 


7.0% 


1.4% 


1.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


183 


29 


13 


11 


4 





240 


69.5 


47.0 


% of Total 




76.3% 


12.1% 


5.4% 


4.6% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 






















Henderson 


Fel 


122 


42 


37 


68 


3 





272 


121.4 


103.0 




Mis 


99 


29 


27 


36 


7 





198 


118.4 


88.5 


McDowell 


Fel 


87 


24 


23 


31 


3 





168 


112.1 


83.5 




Mis 


61 


12 


22 


28 


2 





125 


116.1 


98.0 


Polk 


Fel 


17 


12 


1 


16 


11 





57 


199.2 


120.0 




Mis 


6 


4 


18 


7 


2 


3 


40 


261.3 


150.5 


Rutherford 


Fel 


136 


35 


50 


117 


53 


11 


402 


206.8 


148.5 




Mis 


107 


37 


52 


61 


15 


7 


279 


166.1 


110.0 


Transylvania 


Fel 


40 


36 


28 


23 


12 


6 


145 


189.9 


114.0 




Mis 


10 


3 


5 


6 


4 


1 


29 


206.5 


167.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


402 


149 


139 


255 


82 


17 


1,044 


166.5 


112.0 


% of Total 




38.5% 


14.3% 


13.3% 


24.4% 


7.9% 


1.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


283 


85 


124 


138 


30 


11 


671 


150.1 


105.0 


% of Total 




42.2% 


12.7% 


18.5% 


20.6% 


4.5% 


1.6% 


100.0% 







133 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 











Ages 


of Dispos 


id Lases (1 


Jays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 


30 






















Cherokee 




Fel 


8 





1 1 


3 


1 





23 


143.5 


140.0 






Mis 


5 


26 


16 


4 


1 





52 


126.8 


118.0 


Clay 




Fel 


23 


1 


6 


10 


7 


10 


57 


304.3 


171.0 






Mis 


11 


1 


8 











20 


93.3 


56.0 


Graham 




Fel 


7 


1 


8 


10 


2 


4 


32 


272.2 


193.0 






Mis 


53 


3 


8 


3 


1 


2 


47 


128.5 


88.0 


Haywood 




Fel 


145 


61 


49 


68 


42 


42 


407 


256.5 


115.0 






Mis 


75 


50 


47 


55 


12 


1 


240 


149.8 


117.5 


Jackson 




Fel 


94 


10 


26 


23 


4 


1 


158 


109.0 


70.5 






Mis 


23 


4 


7 


11 


3 


1 


49 


158.6 


104.0 


Macon 




Fel 


23 


21 


9 


11 


19 





83 


186.0 


111.0 






Mis 


25 


11 


8 


15 


1 


1 


61 


149.8 


111.0 


Swain 




Fel 


15 


23 


13 


15 


9 


1 


74 


193.8 


132.0 






Mis 


6 





6 


11 


9 





32 


282.9 


215.0 


Dist Totals 


Fel 


313 


117 


122 


140 


84 


58 


834 


216.7 


114.0 


% of 


Total 




37.5% 


14.0% 


14.6% 


16.8% 


10.1% 


7.0% 


100.0% 










Mis 


175 


95 


100 


99 


27 


5 


501 


152.4 


116.0 


% of 


Total 




31.9% 


19.0% 


20.0% 


19.8% 


5.4% 


1.0% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


Fel 


24,225 


7,373 


7,365 


7,346 


1,900 


681 


4 8,890 


129.9 


91.0 


% of 


Total 




49.6% 


15.1% 


15.1% 


15.0% 


3.9% 


1.4% 


100.0% 










Mis 


19,285 


3,759 


4,163 


3,925 


920 


194 


32,246 


105.8 


71.0 


% of 


Total 




59.8% 


11.7% 


12.9% 


12.2% 


2.9% 


0.6% 


100.0% 







1 34 



PART IV, Section 2 

District Court Division 
Caseflow Data 



The District Court Division 



This section contains data tables and accompanying 
charts depicting the caseflow in 1986-87 of cases filed and 
disposed of in the State's district courts. 

As in prior years, this section gives data on three major 
case classifications in the district court division: civil 
cases, juvenile proceedings, and criminal cases. Civil cases 
are divided into "small claims" cases assigned to magis- 
trates; domestic relations cases (chiefly concerned with 
annulments, divorces, alimony, custody and support of 
children); and "general civil" cases. Juvenile proceedings 
are classified according to the nature of the offense or 
condition alleged in the petition that initiates the case. 
District court criminal cases are divided into motor 
vehicle cases (where the offense charge is defined in 
Chapter 20 of the North Carolina General Statutes) and 
non-motor vehicle criminal cases. 

In addition, this section gives data on a new classifica- 
tion of district court cases, "infractions." Effective 
September 1, 1986, the General Assembly decriminalized 
certain minor traffic offenses. Such offenses, now "in- 
fractions," are non-criminal violations of law; the sanc- 
tion for a person found "responsible" (rather than 
"guilty") for an infraction is a non-criminal "penalty" 
(rather than "fine") not to exceed $100, and cannot 
include imprisonment. Nearly all infraction cases were 
classified as criminal motor vehicle cases in prior Annual 
Reports. (An exception is the infraction of purchase or 
possession of alcohol by a 19 or 20 year old, which was 
neither an infraction nor a criminal offense prior to 
September 1, 1986.) 

Magistrates may handle civil, criminal, and infraction 
cases in district court. When the plaintiff in a civil case 
requests, and the amount in controversy does not exceed 
$1,500, the case may be classified as a "small claim" civil 
action and assigned to a magistrate for hearing. In 
misdemeanor or infraction cases involving alcohol, traf- 
fic, hunting, fishing, and boating violations, magistrates 
may accept written appearances, waivers of trial or 
hearing, and pleas of guilty or admissions of re- 
sponsibility, and enter judgment in accord with the 
schedule of fines and penalties promulgated by chief 
district court judges. Also, magistrates may accept guilty 
pleas in other misdemeanor cases where the sentence 
cannot be in excess of 30 days or $50 fine; and may hear 
and enter judgment in worthless check cases where the 
amount involved is $500 or less, and any prison sentence 
imposed does not exceed 30 days. 

Appeals from magistrates' judgments in both civil and 
criminal, and infraction cases are to the district court, 
with a district court judge presiding. 

Consistent with previous years, the pie charts on the 
following page illustrate that district court criminal cases 
filed and disposed of in the 1986-87 year greatly out- 
numbered civil cases. Motor vehicle criminal cases and 
infractions accounted for over fifty percent of total filings 
and dispositions, and the non-motor vehicle criminal 
cases accounted for about twenty-five percent. As in past 
years, the greatest portion of district court civil filings and 
dispositions were small claims referred to magistrates. 



The large volume categories of infraction, criminal 
motor-vehicle, and civil magistrate cases are not reported 
to AOC by case file numbers. Therefore, it is not possible 
to obtain, by computer processing, the numbers of pend- 
ing cases as of a given date or the ages of cases pending 
and ages of cases at disposition. These categories of cases 
are processed through the courts faster than any others, 
thus explaining the decision not to allocate personnel and 
computer resource to reporting these cases in the detail 
that is provided for other categories of cases. 

Also, juvenile proceedings and hearings on commit- 
ment or recommitment of persons to the State's mental 
hospital facilities are not reported to AOC by case file 
numbers. 

Two tables are provided on juvenile proceedings: 
offenses and conditions alleged, and numbers of adjudi- 
catory hearings held. 

Data on district court hearings for mental hospital 
commitments and recommitments is reported in Part III, 
"Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents." 

Ages of district court cases pending on June 30, 1987, 
and ages of cases disposed of during 1986-87 are reported 
for the domestic relations, general civil and magistrate 
appeal/ transfer, and criminal non-motor vehicle case 
categories. 

The tables for domestic relations and general civil and 
magistrate appeal/ transfer cases show that the median 
age of such cases which were pending on June 30, 1987, 
was 154 and 167 days, respectively, compared with a 
median age of 143 days for domestic relations and 159 
days for general civil and magistrate appeal/ transfer 
cases pending on June 30, 1986. At the time of disposition 
during 1986-87, the median age of domestic relations 
cases was 53 days, and the median age for general civil and 
magistrate/ transfer cases was 109 days, compared with a 
median age of 53 days at the time of disposition for 
domestic relations cases and 105 days for civil and magis- 
trate appeal/ transfer cases during 1985-86. 

For district court non-motor vehicle criminal cases, the 
median age for cases pending on June 30, 1987, was 54 
days compared with a median age of 50 days for cases 
pending on June 30, 1986. The median age of cases in this 
category at the time of disposition during 1986-87 was 29 
days compared with a median age of 28 days at the time of 
disposition during 1985-86. 

The statewide total district court filings during 1986-87, 
not including juvenile cases, and mental hospital com- 
mitment hearings, and civil license revocations, was 
1,807,890 cases, compared with 1,626,149 during 1985-86, 
an increase of 181,741 (11.2%). Criminal motor vehicle 
cases and infraction cases together account for most of 
this increase. There were 975,488 of these cases filed dur- 
ing 1986-87, compared with 839,168 criminal motor vehi- 
cle cases filed during 1985-86, an increase of 136,320 cases 
(16.2%). (As explained above, most cases now classified 
as infractions were counted as criminal motor vehicle 
cases in prior years.) There was an increase of 22,292 cases 
(5.0%) in the non-motor vehicle criminal case category. 

There also was an increase (6.8%) in district court civil 



137 



,11 I 



case filings, from a total of 341.142 in 1985-86 to 364,271 The changes from year-to-year in the individual case 

in 1986-87. Most of this increase was in civil magistrate categories are not unusual. The over-all trend for total 

filings, from 226.044 cases in 1985-86 to 247,455 cases in district court case filings over the past several years has 

1986-8". an increase of 9.5%. In the general civil category, been upward. This upward trend is reflected in the total 

there was an increase of 1.412 cases in 1986-87 compared 1986-87 district court case filings. 
to the number in 1985-86. 






38 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 

FILINGS 



Criminal Motor Vehicle 
(488,494) 



Infraction 
(486,994) 




Criminal Non-Motor Vehicle 
(468,131) 



Domestic Relations 
(67,641) 

General Civil 
(49,175) 



Civil Magistrate 

(247,455) 



Civil License Revocatic-i 
(61,095) 



DISPOSITIONS 



Criminal Motor Vehicle 
(527,344) 




Criminal Non-Motor Vehicle 
(456,699) 



Domestic Relations 
(66,112) 

General Civil 
(45,798) 



Infraction 
(398,653) 



Civil Magistrate 
(239,001) 



Effective September 1, 1986, many previously criminal 
minor traffic offenses were charged as infractions. The 
486,994 infraction filings and 398,653 dispositions above 
all occurred after that date. Taken together, criminal 
motor vehicle and infraction cases still comprise more 
than half the district court caseload. The 61,095 civil 



license revocations in the upper chart are automatic, 10- 
day driver license suspensions imposed on drivers arrested 
on suspicion of impaired driving whose breath tests show 
a blood alcohol content of 0. 10 or more. They are counted 
only at filing, and do not appear on the disposition chart. 



139 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1977 — 1986-87 



2.0 



M 
I 

I 
I 
i 
O 

\ 
s 



O 
F 



1.5 



1.0 



0.5 



0.0 




77 



7K 



78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 



This graph includes all civil, infraction, and criminal case 
filings and dispositions in the district courts for the last 
decade. During the ten year period depicted on this graph, 
filings and dispositions have increased in all but one year. 



Since 1977, total filings have increased from 1,327,195 
cases to the present level of 1 ,807,890 cases, an increase of 
36%. 



140 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS OF CIVIL CASES 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1977 _ 1986-87 



T 
H 
O 

U 

s 

A 

N 
D 

S 



o 

F 



C 

A 
S 
E 
S 



400 



350 



300 



250 



200 



150 



100 



50 




Filings 



Dispositions 



Filings 



Dispositions 



Civil Magistrate Cases 



Filings 




Domestic and Other Cases 



Dispositions 



77 78 78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 



Civil magistrate filings increased by 9.4% during 1986-87, after a 10.8% increase the year before. 



141 



CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



T 
H 


I 

s 
A 
\ 
D 
s 



() 

F 



C 

\ 
S 

I 

s 



~(> 



Ml 



50 



40 



JO 



20 



Hi 



rrTv 



Begin Pending 

Filings 

Dispositions 



67,641 



66,112 



safe.; End Pending 
£2ku 



49.175 



45,798 



28,216 



31,593 






p 7 ?.*:-"^ - -; 








26,449 






W&$% 






>;:?''->:Vf:S.» 






": '.-V-"'-'-'i' ■•• 






&iWB 






'■ . ■ ' I"'"' 






:.-'.V. ■"'•?■*'• 










i;-""-;iv.''v. : : •*.•;• 






>• ••':''.•'.":•: 












•''.-• 










' •."-. -' 







27,978 



'.•*»">•; ••.';-•- 




t.'iife:::.--''-: 




■•; : v::-. , -* - -*<: 




















$3&&33 








;^ ; 5Sr' 




























:<*£:yfcv: 




























»v.v.V';;."--.T:** 








r ;*"?#; : -* ; i\' 




•"■".vV-V-** •;•"• 




•^**-vjV.^v.«; 








'■":?'*;.•; •■:■!*•" 












'"•>•■'.■■«(- ->*?-!;." 








!$*#/&?£ 





GENERAL CIVIL AND CIVIL 
MAGISTRATE APPEALS/TRANSFERS 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 



Filings and dispositions of domestic relations cases grew 
less than 1% each during 1986-87; the average age at 
disposition dropped from 146.6 days in 1985-86 to 133.1 



days in 1986-87. General civil filings grew by 2.9% and 
dispositions by 1.5% over last year. 



142 



FILINGS OF CIVIL (NON— MAGISTRATE) CASES 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



T 

H 
O 

u 

s 

A 
N 
D 

S 



C) 
F 



C 
A 

S 
E 

S 



50 



45 



40 



35 



30 



25 



20 



15 



!0 




URESA IV-D CHILD NON IV-D 

SUPPORT CHILD 

SUPPORT 



OTHER 



GENERAL MAGISTRATE 
CIVIL APPEALS/ 

TRANSFERS 



of Filing 



5.0% 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 

11.1% 21.1% 



20.6% 



38.9% 



3.2% 



"URESA" stands for the Uniform Reciprocal Enforce- 
ment of Support Act, and refers to actions enforcing child 
support orders entered by judges in one state by the courts 
in another. "IV-D Child Support" refers to actions 
initiated by counties or the Department of Human 



Resources to collect child support owed to social services 
clients. "Non IV-D Child Support" actions are initiated 
by custodial parents themselves. The "Other" category 
includes civil actions such as annulment, divorce, equita- 
ble distribution of property, and alimony. 



143 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Domestic Relations Cases 



General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 





Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 








% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 








% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/86 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


7/1/86 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


District 1 


























."ar.de-, 


17 


2^ 


46 


35 


76. 1% 


11 


8 


14 


22 


9 


40.9% 


13 


Chowan 


3 7 


139 


226 


165 


73.0% 


61 


71 


81 


152 


95 


62.5% 


57 


Currituck 


32 


82 


114 


72 


63.21 


42 


58 


69 


127 


66 


52.0% 


61 


Dare 


87 


175 


262 


175 


66.8% 


87 


125 


159 


284 


162 


57.0% 


122 


Gates 


16 


67 


83 


62 


74.7% 


21 


12 


21 


33 


22 


66.7% 


11 


Pasquotank 


38 


342 


440 


311 


70.7% 


129 


101 


156 


257 


159 


61.9% 


98 


Perquimans 


50 


86 


130 


84 


61.8% 


52 


49 


22 


71 


37 


52.1% 


34 



District Totals 337 

District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 309 

District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 

District Totals 793 

District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 

District Totals 1,633 

District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 

District Totals 

District 6 
Bertie 
Halifax 
Hertford 

Nortr.ar.ptori 



611 

1 1 1 

722 



195 

1 11 
56 



970 



854 



2,314 



2,835 



1,546 
278 



272 
730 
344 
182 



District Totals 451 1,528 



District 7 

1 d g e i o ". o e 

Hash 

Wilson 



1,307 



140 


414 


554 


19 


47 


66 


106 


251 


357 


10 


29 


39 


34 


113 


147 



1,163 



170 


550 


720 


363 


907 


1,270 


32 


73 


105 


228 


784 


1,012 



3,107 



904 



855 



2,280 



69.2% 



73.5% 



73.4% 



403 



424 



308 



827 



522 



946 



550 



226 



314 



540 



320 



698 



1,739 



2,437 1,726 



4,4( 



2,157 
389 



1,824 2,546 



361 
925 
455 
238 

1,979 



173 


637 


810 


220 


713 


933 


233 


627 


860 



3,214 



1,603 
283 

1,886 



1,581 



71.9% 1,254 



74.3% 
72.8% 

74.1% 



79.9% 



554 
106 

660 



927 



1,125 
84 

1,209 



1,256 2,183 



1,611 
173 



2,736 
257 



1,784 2,993 



1,214 



1,814 
172 

1,986 



398 



240 



477 



717 



495 



58.1% 



59.3% 



70.8% 



55.6% 



66.3% 
66.9% 



69.0% 



396 



404 


72.9% 


150 


113 


166 


279 


148 


53.0% 


131 


51 


77.3% 


15 


26 


24 


50 


29 


58.0% 


21 


264 


73.9% 


93 


39 


56 


95 


62 


65.3% 


33 


30 


76.9% 


9 


19 


11 


30 


14 


46.7% 


16 


106 


72.1% 


41 


29 


57 


86 


67 


77.9% 


19 



220 



554 


76.9% 


166 


112 


262 


374 


228 


61.0% 


146 


903 


71.1% 


367 


296 


723 


1,019 


767 


75.3% 


252 


76 


72.4% 


29 


21 


29 


50 


38 


76.0% 


12 


747 


73.8% 


265 


269 


725 


994 


693 


69.7% 


301 



711 



157 


399 


556 


408 


73.4% 


148 


100 


141 


241 


148 


61.4% 


93 


39 


34 


73 


49 


67.1% 


24 


40 


67 


107 


54 


50.5% 


53 


,237 


1,826 


3,063 


2,134 


69.7% 


929 


684 


686 


1,370 


674 


49.2% 


696 


200 


576 


776 


623 


80.3% 


153 


103 


362 


465 


338 


72.7% 


127 



969 



922 
85 



66.4% 1,007 



276 


76.5% 


85 


35 


73 


108 


62 


57.4% 


46 


756 


81.7% 


169 


74 


186 


260 


183 


70.4% 


77 


365 


80.2% 


90 


115 


164 


279 


206 


73.8% 


73 


184 


77.3% 


54 


16 


54 


70 


44 


62.9% 


26 



222 



591 


73.0% 


219 


145 


231 


376 


272 


72.3% 


104 


708 


75.9% 


225 


235 


497 


732 


493 


67.3% 


239 


640 


74.4% 


220 


188 


368 


556 


410 


73.7% 


146 



District Totals 626 1,977 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



District Total3 772 2,285 



2,603 



1,939 



74.5% 



664 



568 



1,096 



1,664 



1,175 



3,057 



2,252 



73.7% 



805 



1,212 



2,015 



1,321 



70.6% 



65.6% 



489 



3% 


140 


178 


147 


82.6% 


31 


11 


30 


41 


25 


61.0% 


16 


326 


627 


953 


708 


74.3% 


245 


288 


451 


739 


518 


70.1% 


221 


•i 'j d 


1,518 


1,926 


1,397 


72.5% 


529 


504 


731 


1,235 


778 


63.0% 


457 



694 



1 44 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Domestic Relations Cases 



General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 



Begin End Begin End 

Pending %Caseload Pending Pending %Caseload Pending 

7/1/86 Filings Total Disposed Disposed 6/30/87 7/1/86 Filings Total Disposed Disposed 6/30/87 



District 9 



Franklin 


109 


295 


404 


Granville 


113 


313 


426 


Person 


68 


288 


356 


Vance 


158 


165 


623 


Warren 


81 


191 


272 


District Totals 


529 


1,552 


2,081 


District 10 








Wake 


2,477 


3,688 


6,165 


District 11 









Harnett 198 


648 


846 


Johnston 268 


895 


1,163 


Lee 123 


577 


700 


District Totals 589 


2,120 


2,709 


District 12 






Cumberland 2,360 


4,552 


6,912 


Hoke 85 


232 


317 



District Totals 2,445 4,784 



7,229 



297 


73.5% 


107 


61 


102 


163 


85 


52.1% 


78 


328 


77.0% 


98 


70 


94 


164 


124 


75.6% 


40 


284 


79.8% 


72 


68 


135 


203 


114 


56.2% 


89 


468 


75.1% 


155 


98 


187 


285 


166 


58.2% 


119 


210 


77.2% 


62 


35 


69 


104 


68 


65.4% 


36 


587 


76.3% 


494 


332 


587 


919 


557 


60.6% 


362 


174 


51.5% 


2,991 


2,847 


6,251 


9,098 


4,996 


54.9% 


4,102 


615 


72.7% 


231 


141 


464 


605 


402 


66.4% 


203 


850 


73.1% 


313 


242 


601 


843 


533 


63.2% 


310 


566 


80.9% 


134 


159 


363 


522 


370 


70.9% 


152 



2,031 



4,582 



75.0% 



678 



4,372 63.3% 2,540 
210 66.2% 107 



63.4% 2,647 



542 



822 

62 

884 



1,428 1,970 



1,316 
96 



2,138 
158 



1,412 2,296 



1,305 



1,258 
110 

1,368 



66.2% 



59.6% 



665 



58.8% 880 
69.6% 48 



928 



District 13 



Bladen 


43 


316 


359 


296 


82.5% 


63 


138 


259 


397 


259 


65.2% 


138 


Brunswick 


202 


521 


723 


432 


59.8% 


291 


519 


510 


1,029 


450 


43.7% 


579 


Columbus 


297 


572 


869 


519 


59.7% 


350 


367 


350 


717 


272 


37.9% 


445 


District Totals 


542 


1,409 


1,951 


1,247 


63.9% 


704 


1,024 


1,119 


2,143 


981 


45.8% 


1,162 


District 14 


























Durham 


988 


1,768 


2,756 


1,797 


65.2% 


959 


1,365 


1,488 


2,853 


1,534 


53.8% 


1,319 


District 15A 


























Alamance 


256 


1,129 


1,385 


1,073 


77.5% 


312 


265 


545 


810 


495 


61.1% 


315 


District 15B 


























Chatham 


117 


249 


366 


283 


77.3% 


83 


50 


84 


134 


81 


60.4% 


53 


Orange 


216 


580 


796 


456 


57.3% 


340 


280 


506 


786 


380 


48.3% 


406 


District Totals 


333 


829 


1,162 


739 


63.6% 


423 


330 


590 


920 


461 


50.1% 


459 


District 16 


























Robeson 


306 


1,196 


1,502 


1,255 


83.6% 


247 


437 


792 


1,229 


757 


61.6% 


472 


Scotland 


107 


361 


468 


328 


70.1% 


140 


93 


169 


262 


167 


63.7% 


95 


District Totals 


413 


1,557 


1,970 


1,583 


80.4% 


387 


530 


961 


1,491 


924 


62.0% 


567 


District 17A 


























Caswell 


53 


155 


208 


155 


74.5% 


53 


36 


52 


88 


63 


71.6% 


25 


Rockingham 


260 


795 


1,055 


875 


82.9% 


180 


167 


362 


529 


425 


80.3% 


104 


District Totals 


313 


950 


1,263 


1,030 


81.6% 


233 


203 


414 


617 


488 


79.1% 


129 


District 17B 



























Stokes 69 145 214 176 82.2% 38 33 151 184 108 58.7% 76 

Surry 190 558 748 565 75.5% 183 179 301 480 341 71.0% 139 

District Totals 259 703 962 741 77.0% 221 212 452 664 449 67.6% 215 



145 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Domestic Relations Cases General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 







Begin 










End 


Begin 












End 






Pending 








% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 








% Caseload 


Pending 






" 1 86 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


7/1/86 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Di 


isposed 


6/30/87 


District 


18 




























Guilford 




1,597 


3,957 


5,554 


3,609 


65. 0$ 


1,945 


2,575 


3,983 


6,558 


3,272 




49.9% 


3,286 


District 


19A 




























Cabarrus 




301 


954 


1,255 


1,035 


82.5% 


220 


377 


581 


958 


609 




63.6% 


349 


Rowan 




251 


900 


1,151 


912 


79.2% 


239 


415 


602 


1,017 


711 




69.9% 


306 



District Totals 552 1,854 2,406 1,947 80.9% 459 792 1,183 1,975 1,320 66.8% 655 



District 1 9B 


























Montgomery 


83 


213 


296 


206 


69.6% 


90 


100 


305 


405 


230 


56.8% 


175 


Randolph 


251 


731 


982 


734 


74.7% 


248 


112 


357 


469 


332 


70.8% 


137 


District Totals 


334 


944 


1,278 


940 


73.6% 


338 


212 


662 


874 


562 


64.3% 


312 


District 20 


























Anson 


Sc 


264 


350 


255 


72.9% 


95 


86 


97 


183 


100 


54.6% 


83 


Moore 


277 


621 


898 


547 


60.9% 


351 


431 


303 


734 


243 


33.1% 


491 


Richmond 


17b 


492 


668 


527 


78.9% 


141 


224 


185 


409 


293 


71.6% 


116 


Stanly 


180 


368 


548 


342 


62.4% 


206 


281 


237 


518 


197 


38.0% 


321 


Union 


326 


616 


942 


678 


72.0% 


264 


375 


374 


749 


345 


46.1% 


404 


District Totals 


1,045 


2,361 


3,406 


2,349 


69.0% 


1,057 


1,397 


1,196 


2,593 


1,178 


45.4% 


1,415 


District 21 


























Forsyth 


1,223 


2,677 


3,900 


2,493 


63.9% 


1,407 


1,791 


2,742 


4,533 


2,564 


56.6% 


1,969 


District 22 


























Alexander 


59 


209 


268 


226 


84.3% 


42 


41 


101 


142 


107 


75.4% 


35 


Davidson 


365 


990 


1,355 


908 


67.0% 


447 


246 


553 


799 


478 


59.8% 


321 


Davie 


71 


230 


301 


230 


76.4% 


71 


78 


117 


195 


134 


68.7% 


61 


Iredell 


250 


833 


1,083 


794 


73.3% 


289 


321 


707 


1,028 


724 


70.4% 


304 



20 


78 


98 


4 6 


174 


220 


128 


528 


656 


74 


188 


262 



District Totals 745 2,262 3,007 2,158 71.8% 849 686 1,478 2,164 1,443 66.7% 721 

District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 

District Totals 268 968 1,236 

District 24 

Avery 

"ii.-/, r. 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 288 696 984 674 68.5% 310 475 631 1,106 715 64.6% 391 



84 


105 


189 


26 


100 


126 


33 


113 


146 


11 


252 


363 


in 


126 


160 



81 


82.7% 


17 


37 


62 


99 


73 


73.7% 


26 


160 


72.7% 


60 


42 


87 


129 


77 


59.7% 


52 


524 


79.9% 


132 


218 


710 


928 


605 


65.2% 


323 


192 


73.3% 


70 


69 


156 


225 


138 


61.3% 


87 


957 


77.4% 


279 


366 


1,015 


1,381 


893 


64.7% 


488 


121 


64.0% 


68 


86 


156 


242 


127 


52.5% 


115 


90 


71.4% 


36 


65 


50 


115 


88 


76.5% 


27 


100 


68.5% 


46 


96 


77 


173 


75 


43.4% 


98 


250 


68.9% 


113 


213 


313 


526 


394 


74.9% 


132 


113 


70.6% 


47 


15 


35 


50 


31 


62.0% 


19 



District 25 


























Burke 


334 


753 


1,087 


878 


80.8% 


209 


212 


407 


619 


459 


74.2% 


160 


Caldwell 


234 


655 


889 


690 


77.6% 


199 


149 


406 


555 


395 


71.2% 


160 


b t a h z. a 


523 


1,310 


1,833 


1,357 


74.0% 


476 


409 


727 


1,136 


766 


67.4% 


370 


District Totals 


1,091 


2,718 


3,809 


2,925 


76.8% 


884 


770 


1,540 


2,310 


1,620 


70.1% 


690 


District 26 


























Mecklenburg 


1,447 


5,288 


6,735 


4,873 


72.4% 


1,862 


3,321 


7,258 


10,579 


5,884 


55.6% 


4,695 



146 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Domestic Relations Cases 



General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 





B( 


•gin 










End 


B 


egin 










End 




Per 


iding 








% Caseload 


Pending 


Pe 


nding 








%Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/86 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


7/1/86 


Filings 


Total 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


District 27A 






























Gaston 




640 


2,353 


2,993 


2,266 


75.7% 


727 




362 


615 


977 


659 


67.5% 


318 


District 27B 






























Cleveland 




217 


1,000 


1,217 


1,013 


83.2% 


204 




78 


282 


360 


275 


76.4% 


85 


Lincoln 




88 


450 


538 


443 


82.3% 


95 




51 


167 


218 


155 


71.1% 


63 


District Totals 


305 


1,450 


1,755 


1,456 


83.0% 


299 




129 


449 


578 


430 


74.4% 


148 


District 28 






























Buncombe 




724 


2,136 


2,860 


1,954 


68.3% 


906 




671 


1,462 


2,133 


1,394 


65.4% 


739 


District 29 






























Henderson 




285 


556 


841 


587 


69.8% 


254 




281 


242 


523 


314 


60.0% 


209 


McDowell 




114 


354 


468 


335 


71.6% 


133 




75 


141 


216 


151 


69.9% 


65 


Polk 




26 


55 


81 


52 


64.2% 


29 




25 


45 


70 


41 


58.6% 


29 


Rutherford 




240 


488 


728 


570 


78.3% 


158 




99 


135 


234 


160 


68.4% 


74 


Transylvania 




171 


246 


417 


289 


69.3% 


128 




237 


214 


451 


311 


69.0% 


140 


District Totals 


836 


1,699 


2,535 


1,833 


72.3% 


702 




717 


777 


1,494 


977 


65.4% 


517 


District 30 






























Cherokee 




60 


169 


229 


152 


66.4% 


77 




21 


57 


78 


58 


74.4% 


20 


Clay 




17 


37 


54 


36 


66.7% 


18 




21 


24 


45 


36 


80.0% 


9 


Graham 




32 


75 


107 


68 


63.6% 


39 




18 


17 


35 


19 


54.3% 


16 


Haywood 




232 


464 


696 


464 


66.7% 


232 




89 


202 


291 


157 


54.0% 


134 


Jackson 




83 


198 


281 


183 


65.1% 


98 




80 


123 


203 


151 


74.4% 


52 


Macon 




90 


169 


259 


183 


70.7% 


76 




58 


81 


139 


83 


59.7% 


56 


Swain 




53 


90 


143 


97 


67.8% 


46 




36 


33 


69 


38 


55.1% 


31 


District Totals 


567 


1,202 


1,769 


1,183 


66.9% 


586 




323 


537 


860 


542 


63.0% 


318 


State Totals 


26 


,449 


67,641 


94,090 


66,112 


70.3% 


27,978 


28 


,216 


49,175 


77,391 


45,798 


59.2% 


31,593 



147 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL 
(NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 
(19,853) 



Judge's Final 

Order Judgment Without 

Trial 

(22,589) 




Trial by Judge 
(44,259) 



Clerk 
(17,680) 



Other 
(6,806) 



0.6% Trial by Jury 

(723) 



Most civil cases in the district courts are disposed of by 
judges, either before trial or with a bench (non-jury) trial. 
The "other" category includes actions such as removal to 



federal court or an order from another state closing a 
Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Case. 



148 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



Other 



Total 
Disposed 



District 1 



Camden 


Gen 


1 





2 







Dom 





9 


4 


20 


Chowan 


Gen 


2 


17 


25 


9 




Dom 





54 


12 


93 


Currituck 


Gen 





17 


19 


9 




Dom 





47 


13 


7 


Dare 


Gen 


1 


12 


57 


33 




Dom 





19 


24 


108 


Gates 


Gen 


1 





5 


1 




Dom 


3 


22 


7 


25 


Pasquotank 


Gen 


1 


21 


53 


12 




Dom 





204 


41 


59 


Perquimans 


Gen 


1 


2 


9 


5 




Dom 


5 


51 


7 


19 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


7 


69 


170 


69 


? of Total 




1.3? 


12.5? 


30.9? 


12.5? 




Dom 


8 


406 


108 


331 


? of Total 




0.9% 


44.9? 


11.9? 


36.6? 


District 2 












Beaufort 


Gen 


4 


24 


42 


22 




Dom 





228 


21 


96 


Hyde 


Gen 


1 


4 


9 


6 




Dom 


1 


1 


2 


42 


Martin 


Gen 


3 


1 


13 


25 




Dom 





20 


17 


201 


Tyrrell 


Gen 





3 


4 


1 




Dom 





2 


2 


25 


Washington 


Gen 





9 


11 


8 




Dom 





54 


9 


40 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


8 


41 


79 


62 


? of Total 




2.5? 


12.8? 


24.7? 


19.4? 




Dom 


1 


305 


51 


404 


? of Total 




0.1? 


35.7? 


6.0? 


47.3? 


District 3 












Carteret 


Gen 





73 


80 


17 




Dom 





443 


32 


17 


Craven 


Gen 


8 


39 


200 


117 




Dom 


12 


553 


33 


123 


Pamlico 


Gen 


2 


2 


13 


8 




Dom 





27 


5 


26 


Pitt 


Gen 


1 


26 


247 


379 




Dom 


25 


548 


27 


62 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


11 


140 


540 


521 


? of Total 




0.6? 


8.1? 


31.3? 


30.2? 




Dom 


37 


1,571 


97 


228 


? of Total 




1.6? 


68.9? 


4.3? 


10.0? 


District 4 













Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 



Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 



Dist Totals Gen 
? of Total 

Dom 
? of Total 



2 


1 

2 
17 
2 
2 

7 
0.6? 

19 
0.6? 



27 

79 

1 



135 

1,293 

22 

255 

185 
15.2? 
1,627 

50.6? 



46 

18 

3 

9 

203 
139 
231 

142 

483 

39.8? 

308 

9.6? 



21 

309 

39 

30 

33 

88 

6 

210 

99 

8.2? 

637 

19.8? 



5 


1 





2 


37 


5 


1 


5 


9 


12 


1 


4 


56 


3 


2 


22 


13 


2 





5 


62 


10 


1 


6 


15 


5 





2 


197 


38 


35.8? 


6.9? 


5 


46 


0.6? 


5.1? 


52 


4 


39 


20 


7 


2 





5 


lb 


4 





26 


6 





l 





36 


3 





3 


117 


13 


36.6? 


4.1? 


40 


54 


4.7? 


6.3? 


50 


8 


5 


57 


315 


88 


5 


177 


5 


8 


1 


17 


2 


38 


U 


85 


372 


142 


21.6? 


8.2? 


11 


336 


0.5? 


14.7? 


49 


3 





2 


9 


1 





10 


118 


183 


4 


593 


58 


19 


1 


13 


234 


206 


19.3? 


17.0? 


5 


618 


0.2? 


19.2? 



9 

35 

95 

165 

66 

72 

162 

175 
22 
62 

159 

311 
37 

84 

550 
100.0? 

904 
100.0? 



148 

404 
29 
51 
62 

264 
14 
30 
67 

106 

320 

100.0? 

855 

100.0? 



228 
554 
767 
903 
38 
76 
693 
747 

1,726 
100.0? 
2,280 
100.0? 



148 

408 

54 

49 

674 

2,134 

338 

623 

1,214 
100.0? 
3,214 
100.0? 



-Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/ transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



149 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by- 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



Other 



Total 
Disposed 



District 5 



New Hanover 


Gen 


19 


231 


484 


165 




Dom 


3 


851 


101 


434 


Pender 


Gen 


5 


17 


72 


15 




Dom 


2 


89 


26 


143 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


24 


248 


556 


180 


% of Total 




1.21 


12.5% 


28.0% 


9.1% 




Dom 


5 


940 


130 


577 


% of Total 




0.3% 


49.8% 


6.9% 


30.6% 


District 6 












Bertie 


Gen 


2 


9 


17 


8 




Dom 





100 


12 


153 


Halifax 


Gen 


1 


45 


45 


40 




Dom 


2 


276 


20 


434 


Hertford 


Gen 


1 


24 


43 


62 




Dom 





136 


20 


191 


Northampton 


j en 


1 


8 


13 


1 




Dom 





159 


10 


4 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


5 


86 


118 


111 


% of Total 




1.0% 


17.4% 


23.8% 


22.4% 




Dom 


2 


671 


62 


782 


% of Total 




0.1% 


42.4% 


3.9% 


49.5% 


District 7 












Edgecombe 


Gen 


3 


25 


84 


39 




Dom 





270 


40 


246 


Nash 


Gen 


3 


49 


138 


52 




Dom 





4 93 


38 


128 


Wilson 


Gen 


14 


49 


114 


69 




Dom 


1 


!»24 


33 


156 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


10 


123 


336 


160 


% of Total 




0.9% 


10.5% 


28.6% 


13.6% 




Dom 


1 


1,192 


111 


530 


% of Total 




0.1% 


61.5% 


5.7% 


27.3% 


District 8 












Greene 


Gen 








6 


17 




Dom 








7 


129 


Lenoir 


Gen 


5 


68 


164 


93 




Dom 





463 


82 


159 


Wayne 


Gen 


18 


85 


301 


75 




Dom 


15 


797 


150 


383 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


23 


153 


471 


185 


% of Total 




1.7% 


11.6% 


35.7% 


14.0% 




Dom 


15 


1,260 


239 


671 


% of Total 




0.7% 


56.0% 


10.6% 


29.8% 


District 9 













Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

.' i r . r , e 
Warren 



Dist Totals 
% of Total 

% of Total 



Gen 

Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Den 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Sen 

Dom 
',--. 
Dom 



D 
D 

3 

', 
4 
1 
I 
1 
4 
9 

14 
2.5% 

17 
1.1% 



1 
2 

33 
156 

31 
251 

30 
264 

10 

79 

105 

18.9% 

752 

47.4% 



39 
53 
43 
31 
35 
21 
43 
21 
16 
12 

176 

31.6% 

138 

8.7% 



25 

240 

14 

41 



4 

12 

135 

17 

101 



12.2% 

521 

32.8% 



572 


343 


10 


201 


51 


12 


2 


21 


623 


355 


31.4% 


17.9% 


12 


222 


0.6% 


11.8% 


23 


3 


3 


8 


52 





?- 


22 


75 


1 


7 


11 


20 


1 





1 1 


170 


5 


34.3% 


1.0% 


12 


52 


0.8% 


3.3% 


92 


29 


1 


34 


227 


24 


7 


37 


158 


16 


5 


21 


477 


69 


40.6% 


5.9% 


13 


92 


0.7% 


4.7% 





2 





11 


185 


3 


4 





251 


48 


18 


34 


436 


53 


33.0% 


4.0% 


22 


45 


1.0% 


2.0% 


19 


1 


1 


1 


18 


13 


62 


32 


37 


7 


2 


5 


DD 


22 


2 


45 


21 





1 


8 


151 


43 


27.1% 


7.7% 


68 


91 


4.3% 


5.7% 



1,814 

1,603 

172 

283 

1,986 
100.0% 
1,886 
100.0% 



62 
276 
183 
756 
206 
365 

44 
184 

495 
100.0% 
1,581 
100.0% 



272 

591 
493 
708 
410 
640 

1,175 
100. 0J 
1,939 
100.0% 



25 

147 
518 
708 
778 
1,397 

1,321 

100.0% 

2,252 

100.0% 



85 

297 
124 
328 
114 
284 
166 
468 
68 
210 

557 
100.0% 
1,587 
100.0% 



: 'Ca-,';i oovered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



150 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



Other 



Total 
Disposed 



District 10 



Wake 


Gen 


22 


427 


1,283 


582 


2,326 


356 


4,996 


% of Total 




0.4% 


8.5% 


25.7% 


11.6% 


46.6% 


7.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 


3 


1,889 


251 


881 


19 


131 


3,174 


% of Total 




0.1% 


59.5% 


7.9% 


27.8% 


0.6% 


4.1% 


100.0% 


District 11 


















Harnett 


Gen 


6 


54 


198 


56 


86 


2 


402 




Dom 


1 


271 


4y 


278 


7 


9 


615 


Johnston 


Gen 


6 


1 


152 


162 


208 


4 


533 




Dom 


3 


198 


99 


541 


2 


7 


850 


Lee 


Gen 


8 


54 


145 


48 


112 


3 


370 




Dom 





318 


55 


192 


1 





566 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


20 


109 


495 


266 


406 


9 


1,305 


% of Total 




1.5% 


8.4% 


37.9% 


20.4% 


31.1% 


0.7% 


100.0% 




Dom 


4 


787 


203 


1,011 


10 


16 


2,031 


% of Total 




0.2% 


38.7% 


10.0% 


49.8% 


0.5% 


0.8% 


100.0% 


District 12 


















Cumberland 


Gen 


5 


239 


409 


90 


383 


172 


1,258 




Dom 


14 


2,523 


348 


933 


5 


549 


4,372 


Hoke 


Gen 





24 


47 


6 


33 





110 




Dom 





82 


18 


108 


2 





210 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


5 


263 


456 


56 


416 


172 


1,368 


% of Total 




0.4% 


19.2% 


33.3% 


4.1% 


30.4% 


12.6% 


100.0% 




Dom 


14 


2,605 


366 


1,041 


7 


549 


4,582 


% of Total 




0.3% 


56.9% 


8.0% 


22.7% 


0.2% 


12.0% 


100.0% 


District 13 


















Bladen 


Gen 


4 


55 


87 


24 


87 


2 


259 




Dom 





126 


17 


150 


1 


2 


296 


Brunswick 


Gen 


3 


86 


238 


25 


93 


5 


450 




Dom 





211 


23 


198 








432 


Columbus 


Gen 


14 


48 


92 


29 


85 


4 


272 




Dom 


4 


347 


47 


106 





15 


519 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


21 


189 


417 


78 


265 


11 


981 


% of Total 




2.1% 


19.3% 


42.5% 


8.0% 


27.0% 


1.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 


4 


684 


87 


454 


1 


17 


1,247 


% of Total 




0.3% 


54.9% 


7.0% 


36.4% 


0.1% 


1.4% 


100.0% 


District 14 


















Durham 


Gen 


5 


216 


445 


58 


655 


155 


1,534 


% of Total 




0.3% 


14.1% 


29.0% 


3.8% 


42.7% 


10.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 


1 


1,006 


154 


487 


7 


142 


1,797 


% of Total 




0.1% 


56.0% 


8.6% 


27.1% 


0.4% 


7.9% 


100.0% 


District 15A 


















Alamance 


Gen 


7 


66 


178 


59 


161 


24 


495 


% of Total 




1.4% 


13.3% 


36.0% 


11.9% 


32.5% 


4.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


669 


105 


260 


6 


31 


1,073 


% of Total 




0.2% 


62.3% 


9.8% 


24.2% 


0.6% 


2.9% 


100.0% 


District 15B 



















Chatham 
Orange 



Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 



6 

122 

69 

332 



39 

30 

152 

19 



3 
91 
25 
64 



21 

6 

126 

22 



10 

33 

8 

19 



81 

283 

i 80 
456 



Dist Totals Gen 
% of Total 

Dom 
% of Total 



2 
0.4% 

1 
0.1% 



75 

16.3% 

454 

61.4% 



191 

41.4% 

49 

6.6% 



28 

6.1% 

155 

21.0% 



147 

31.95 

28 

3.85 



18 
3.9% 

52 
7.0% 



461 
100.0% 

739 
100.0% 



"•'•Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



I5l 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



Other 



Total 
Disposed 



District 16 



Robeson 


Gen 


7 


133 


34o 


11 


203 


7 


757 




Dom 





629 


83 


417 


10 


116 


1,255 


Scotland 


Sen 


1 


23 


61 


16 


57 


9 


167 




Dora 





161 


17 


119 


1 


30 


328 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


8 


206 


407 


27 


260 


16 


924 


% of Total 




0.9% 


22.3% 


44.0% 


2.9% 


28.1% 


1.7% 


100.0% 




Oom 





790 


100 


536 


11 


146 


1,583 


% of Total 




0.0% 


49.9% 


6.3% 


33.9% 


0.7% 


9.2% 


100.0% 


District 17A 


















Caswell 


Zen 








11 


41 


7 


4 


63 




Dom 








7 


134 





14 


155 


Rockingham 


Gen 





36 


116 


24 


230 


19 


425 




Dom 


2 


475 


96 


224 


2 


76 


875 


Dist Totals 


Gen 





36 


127 


65 


237 


23 


488 


% of Total 




0.0% 


7.4% 


26.0% 


13.3% 


48.6% 


4.7% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


475 


103 


358 


2 


90 


1,030 


% of Total 




0.2% 


46.1% 


10.0% 


34.8% 


0.2% 


8.7% 


100.0% 


District 1 7B 


















Stokes 


Gen 


6 


12 


27 


43 


11 


9 


108 




Dom 


17 


38 


23 


59 


1 


38 


176 


Surry 


Gen 


5 


39 


93 


56 


144 


4 


341 




Dom 


3 


283 


36 


235 


3 


5 


565 


Dist Totals 


3en 


11 


51 


120 


99 


155 


13 


449 


% of Total 




2.4% 


11.4% 


26.7% 


22.0% 


34.5% 


2.9% 


100.0% 




Dom 


20 


321 


59 


294 


4 


43 


741 


% of Total 




2.7% 


13.3% 


8.0% 


39.7% 


0.5% 


5.8% 


100.0% 


District 18 


















Guilford 


Gen 


30 


340 


1,017 


319 


1,471 


95 


3,272 


% of Total 




0.9% 


10.4% 


31.1% 


9.7% 


45.0% 


2.9% 


100.0% 




Dom 


15 


3,129 


134 


240 


38 


53 


3,609 


% of Total 




0.4% 


86.7% 


3.7% 


6.7% 


1.1% 


1.5% 


100.0% 


District 19A 


















Cabarrus 


Gen 


6 


76 


243 


72 


204 


8 


609 




Dora 





602 


111 


316 


4 


2 


1,035 


Rowan 


Gen 


.< 


132 


237 


44 


292 


2 


711 




Dom 


1 


658 


95 


150 


3 


5 


912 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


10 


208 


480 


116 


496 


10 


1,320 


% of Total 




0.8% 


15.8% 


36.4% 


8.8% 


37.6% 


0.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 


1 


1,260 


206 


466 


7 


7 


1,947 


% of Total 




0.1% 


64.7% 


10.6% 


23.9% 


0.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 


District 19B 



















Montgomery Gen 

Dom 1 

Randolph Gen 6 

Dom 4 



18 
174 

43 
347 



113 

14 

73 
61 



1/ 

11 

14 

219 



87 



183 

6 




6 

13 

97 



230 
206 
332 

734 



Di3t Totals Gen 
% of Total 

Dom 
% of Total 



6 

1.1% 

5 
0.5% 



61 
10.9% 

521 
55.4% 



186 

33.1% 

75 

8.0% 



26 

4.6% 

230 

24.5% 



270 

48.0% 
6 
0.6% 



13 

2.3% 

103 

11.0% 



562 

100.0% 

940 
100.0% 



*Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



152 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



Other 



Total 
Disposed 



District 20 



Anson 


Gen 


4 


12 


49 


15 


19 


1 


100 




Dom 


1 


123 


26 


95 


6 


4 


255 


Moore 


Gen 


6 


69 


84 


25 


55 


4 


243 




Dom 


1 


367 


58 


115 


1 


5 


547 


Richmond 


Gen 


1 


47 


161 


6 


61 


17 


293 




Dom 





407 


44 


12 


25 


39 


527 


Stanly 


Gen 


2 


25 


53 


116 


1 





197 




Dom 


1 


211 


17 


110 





3 


342 


Union 


Gen 


21 


44 


103 


64 


97 


16 


345 




Dom 


4 


416 


29 


172 


3 


54 


678 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


34 


197 


450 


226 


233 


38 


1,178 


% of Total 




2.9% 


16.7% 


38.2% 


19.2% 


19.8% 


3.2% 


100.0% 




Dom 


7 


1,524 


174 


504 


35 


105 


2,349 


% of Total 




0.3% 


64.9% 


7.4% 


21.5% 


1.5% 


4.5% 


100.0% 


District 21 


















Forsyth 


Gen 


13 


125 


870 


324 


1,190 


42 


2,564 


% of Total 




0.5% 


4.9% 


33.9% 


12.6% 


46.4% 


1.6% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


1,717 


215 


493 


21 


45 


2,493 


% of Total 




0.1% 


68.9% 


8.6% 


19.8% 


0.8% 


1.8% 


100.0% 


District 22 


















Alexander 


Gen 


5 


6 


38 


10 


40 


8 


107 




Dom 


2 


117 


16 


67 


1 


23 


22b 


Davidson 


Gen 


7 


59 


169 


34 


184 


25 


478 




Dom 


3 


516 


58 


288 


11 


32 


908 


Davie 


Gen 


3 


49 


43 


4 


27 


8 


134 




Dom 





160 


51 


10 





9 


230 


Iredell 


Gen 


4 


61 


205 


50 


388 


16 


724 




Dom 





408 


66 


221 


11 


85 


794 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


19 


175 


455 


98 


639 


57 


1,443 


% of Total 




1.3% 


12.1% 


31.5% 


6.8% 


44.3% 


4.0% 


100.0% 




Dom 


5 


1,201 


191 


589 


23 


149 


2,158 


% of Total 




0.2% 


55.7% 


8.9% 


27.3% 


1.1% 


6.9% 


100.0% 


District 23 


















Alleghany 


Gen 


1 


16 


31 


7 


16 


2 


73 




Dom 


3 


49 


9 


15 


3 


2 


81 


Ashe 


Gen 


4 


23 


26 


4 


15 


5 


77 




Dom 





131 


14 


11 


3 


1 


160 


Wilkes 


Gen 


7 


20 


163 


135 


275 


5 


605 




Dom 





139 


49 


326 


8 


2 


524 


Yadkin 


Gen 


2 


11 


48 


30 


43 


4 


138 




Dom 


2 


95 


23 


6 3 





9 


192 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


14 


70 


268 


176 


349 


16 


893 


% of Total 




1.6% 


7.8% 


30.0% 


19.7% 


39.1% 


1.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 


5 


414 


95 


415 


14 


14 


957 


% of Total 




0.5% 


43.3% 


9.9% 


43.4% 


1.5% 


1.5% 


100.0% 


District 24 ' 



















Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 



Dist Totals 
% of Total 

% of Total 



Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 
Gen 
Dom 

Gen 

Dom 



2 

2 
2 
2 

1 




7 
1.0% 

2 
0.3% 



9 

54 

26 
M 

9 

29 

49 

138 

4 
61 

97 

13.6% 

315 

46.7% 



59 
19 
11 
10 
29 
22 
187 
32 
10 
14 

296 
41.4% 

97 
14.4% 



14 
40 
2 3 
28 

i2 

47 
54 

66 

6 

33 

129 
18.0% 

214 
31.8% 



42 
1 

4 




72 

8 
1 

126 
17.6% 
2 
0.3% 



1 

7 
22 
17 

3 

2 
31 

14 

3 

4 

60 
8.4% 

44 
6.5% 



127 

121 

88 

90 

75 

100 

394 

250 

31 

113 

715 
100.0% 

674 
100.0% 



*Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



153 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Trial by 
Jury 



Trial by 
Judge 



Voluntary 
Dismissal 



Judge's Final 

Order or 

Judgment 

without Trial 



Clerk 



Other 



Total 
Disposed 



District 25 



3urke 


Gen 


9 


63 


187 


21 




Dora 


1 


5 07 


101 


195 


Caldwell 


Gen 


9 


18 


118 


81 




Dora 


1 


339 


52 


211 


Catawba 


Gen 


11 


57 


216 


114 




Dora 


2 


681 


128 


535 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


29 


138 


521 


216 


% of Total 




1.81 


8.5% 


32.2% 


13.3% 




Dom 


4 


1,527 


281 


941 


% of Total 




0.1% 


52.2? 


9.6% 


32.2% 


District 26 












Mecklenburg 


Jen 


43 


665 


1,855 


601 


% of Total 




0.7% 


11.3% 


31.5% 


10.2% 




Dom 


2 


3,795 


253 


761 


% of Total 




.0% 


77.9% 


5.2% 


15.6% 


District 27A 












Gaston 


Gen 


24 


131 


230 


60 


% of Total 




3.6% 


19.9% 


34.9% 


9.1% 




Dom 


1 


1,576 


133 


195 


% of Total 




. )% 


69.5% 


5.9% 


8.6% 


District 27B 












Cleveland 


Gen 


6 


35 


65 


37 




Dom 


2 


469 


67 


372 


Lincoln 


Gen 


2 


30 


39 


31 




Dom 


1 


248 


35 


149 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


8 


65 


104 


68 


% of Total 




1.9% 


15.1% 


24.2% 


15.8% 




Dom 


3 


717 


102 


521 


% of Total 




0.2% 


49.2% 


7.0% 


35.8% 


District 28 












Buncombe 


Gen 


27 


146 


368 


200 


% of Total 




1.9% 


10.5% 


26.4% 


14.3% 




Dom 


2 


1,075 


179 


548 


% of Total 




0.1J 


55.0% 


9.2% 


28.0% 


District 29 













Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 



Dist Totals 
% of Total 

% of Total 



Sen 

Dom 
Sen 

Dom 
Gen 

Dom 
Gen 

' j ■■,-.'. 
Gen 
Dom 

Gen 

Dom 



7 
2 
1 


•> 

3 
1 
2 


13 
1.3% 

O 
J 

0.2% 



43 

441 

9 

8 





50 

394 

;m 

125 

123 
12.6% 

968 
52.8% 



104 

53 

37 

52 

9 

4 

4 2 

51 

130 

39 

322 

33.0% 

199 

10.9% 



36 
37 

:••) 
263 
24 
40 
12 
80 
31 
79 

132 
13.5% 

499 
27.2% 



85 


94 


1 


73 


146 


23 


6 


81 


326 


42 





11 


557 


159 


34.4% 


9.8% 


7 


165 


0.2% 


5.6% 


,701 


19 


45.9% 


0.3% 


32 


30 


0.7% 


0.6% 


169 


45 


25.6% 


6.8% 


4 


357 


0.2% 


15.8% 


84 


48 


9 


94 


50 


3 


3 


7 


134 


51 


31.2% 


11.9% 


12 


101 


0.8% 


6.9% 


550 


103 


39.5% 


7.4% 


37 


113 


1.9% 


5.8% 


79 


45 


2 


52 


57 


18 


5 


7 


6 


2 





8 


44 


9 


10 


34 


116 


11 


2 


44 


302 


85 


30.9% 


8.7% 


19 


145 


1.0% 


7.9% 



459 
878 
395 
690 
766 
1,357 

1,620 
100.0% 
2,925 
100.0% 



5,884 
100.0% 
4,873 
100.0% 



659 
100.0% 
2,266 

100.0% 



275 

1,013 
155 
443 

430 
100.0% 
1,456 
100.0% 



1,394 

100.0% 

1,954 

100.0% 



314 
587 
151 
335 
41 
52 
160 
570 
311 
289 

977 
100.0% 
1,833 
100.0% 



*Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to judges, all 
identified as (GEM), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



154 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 















Judge's Final 




















Order or 














Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 








Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 30 


















Cherokee 


Gen 





6 


14 


11 


25 


2 


58 






Dom 





101 


16 


27 





8 


152 


Clay 




Gen 





7 


9 


16 


3 


1 


36 






Dora 








11 


20 


4 


1 


36 


Graham 




Gen 


2 


3 


5 


6 


2 


1 


19 






Dom 


3 


40 


12 


9 


3 


1 


68 


Haywood 




Gen 


3 


40 


57 


9 


41 


7 


157 






Dom 


8 


308 


51 


73 


6 


18 


464 


Jackson 




Gen 


3 


13 


71 


16 


41 


7 


151 






Dom 





78 


16 


77 





12 


183 


Macon 




Gen 


3 


14 


28 


14 


15 


9 


83 






Dom 


1 


118 


15 


34 





15 


183 


Swain 




Gen 





8 


15 


7 


7 


l 


38 






Dom 





51 


8 


32 


1 


5 


97 


Dist Totals 


Gen 


11 


91 


199 


79 


134 


28 


542 


% of 


Total 




2.0% 


16.8% 


36.7% 


14.6% 


24.7% 


5.2% 


100.0% 






Dom 


12 


696 


129 


272 


14 


60 


1,183 


% of 


Total 




1.0% 


58.8% 


10.9% 


23.0% 


1.2% 


5.1% 


100.0% 


State Totals 


Gen 


498 


5,420 


14,669 


5,543 


17,126 


2,542 


45,798 


% of 


Total 




1.1% 


11.8% 


32.0% 


12.1% 


37.4% 


5.6% 


100.0% 






Dom 


225 


38,839 


5,184 


17,046 


554 


4,264 


66,112 


% of 


Total 




0.3% 


58.7% 


7.8% 


25.8% 


0.8% 


6.4% 


100.0% 



-Cases covered in this table are general civil and appeals/transfers from magistrates to juc 
identified as (GEN), and Domestic Relations (DOM) cases. 



all 



155 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


9 


81.81 


1 


9.1% 


1 


9.1% 


11 


162.5 


106.0 


Chowan 


40 


65. 6% 


13 


21.3% 


8 


13.1% 


61 


220.0 


81.0 


Currituck 


30 


71.4* 


6 


14.3% 


6 


14.3% 


42 


158.1 


94.5 


Dare 


46 


52. 9% 


18 


20.7% 


23 


26.4% 


87 


260.4 


160.0 


Gates 


18 


85. 7% 


2 


9.5% 


1 


4.8% 


21 


104.7 


62.0 


Pasquotank 


96 


74.4% 


16 


12.4% 


17 


13.2% 


129 


174.4 


102.0 


Perquimans 


16 


30.8% 


10 


19.2% 


26 


50.0% 


52 


523.4 


360.0 



District Totals 



255 



63.3% 



66 



16.4% 



82 



20.3% 



403 



239.3 



116.0 



District 


2 




















Beaufort 




81 


54.0% 


28 


18.7% 


41 


27.3% 


150 


279.5 


153.0 


Hyde 




12 


80.0% 


2 


13.3% 


1 


6.7% 


15 


145.5 


98.0 


Martin 




26 


28.0% 


21 


22.6% 


46 


49.5% 


93 


584.6 


365.0 


Tyrrell 




8 


88.9% 


1 


11.1% 





0.0% 


9 


70.0 


56.0 


Washington 


25 


61.0% 


6 


14.6% 


10 


24.4% 


41 


238.9 


106.0 



District Totals 



152 



49.4% 



58 



31.8% 



308 



353.6 



197.5 



District 


A 




















Carteret 




114 


68.7% 


30 


18.1% 


22 


13.3% 


166 


154.0 


104.0 


Craven 




212 


57.8% 


94 


25.6% 


61 


16.6% 


367 


184.6 


124.0 


Pamlico 




21 


72.4% 


4 


13.8% 


4 


13.8% 


29 


156.5 


131.0 


Pitt 




183 


69.1% 


53 


20.0% 


29 


10.9% 


265 


153.8 


88.0 


District Totals 


530 


64.1% 


181 


21.9% 


116 


14.0% 


827 


167.6 


110.0 


District 


1 




















Duplin 




83 


56.1% 


35 


23.6% 


30 


20.3% 


148 


233.7 


139.0 


Jones 




5 


20.8% 


5 


20.8% 


14 


58.3% 


24 


655.0 


460.5 


Onslow 




504 


54.3% 


200 


21.5% 


225 


24.2% 


929 


250.6 


154.0 


Sampson 




92 


60.1% 


45 


29.4% 


16 


10.5% 


153 


183.3 


118.0 



District Totals 



684 



54.5% 



285 



22.7% 



285 



22.7% 



1,254 



248.2 



153.0 



District 5 



New Hanover 


345 


62.3% 


99 


17.9% 


110 


19.9% 


Pender 


51 


48.1% 


28 


26.4% 


27 


25.5% 


District Totals 


396 


60.0% 


127 


19.2% 


137 


20.8% 


District 6 














Bertie 


57 


67.1% 


18 


21.2% 


10 


11.8% 


Halifax 


146 


86.4% 


18 


10.7% 


5 


3.0% 


Hertford 


72 


80.0% 


14 


15.6% 


4 


4.4% 


Northampton 


38 


70.4% 


10 


18.5% 


6 


1 1.1% 


District Totals 


313 


78.6% 


60 


15.1% 


25 


6.3% 


District 7 















Edgecombe 
Nash 
Ai La o n 



140 


63.9% 


37 


16.9% 


42 


19.2% 


161 


71.6% 


31 


13.8% 


33 


14.7% 


137 


62.3% 


26 


11.8% 


57 


25.9% 



554 
106 

660 



85 

169 
90 

54 

398 



219 
225 
220 



207.4 
318.3 

225.2 



161.2 

95.2 

111.6 

162.9 

122.2 



229.6 
168.6 
379.0 



119.0 
202.5 

131.0 



89.0 
70.0 
49.0 
88.5 

70.0 



98.0 
69.0 
98.0 



District Total3 



438 



66.0% 



94 



14.2% 



132 



19.9% 



664 



258.5 



89.5 



District 3 
Greene 

.':■,', . r 

Wayne 



17 


54.8% 


9 


29.0% 


5 


16.1% 


155 


63.3% 


62 


25.3% 


28 


11.4% 


327 


61.8% 


117 


22.1% 


85 


16.1% 



31 

245 
529 



217.3 

171.1 
187.2 



169.0 
106.0 
106.0 



District Totals 



"99 



62.0% 



23.4% 



11! 



14.7% 



805 



183.0 



109.0 



156 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 

District Totals 

District 10 
Wake 















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 


<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


64 


59.8% 


21 


19.6% 


22 


20.6% 




107 


266.5 


89.0 


64 


65. 3% 


21 


21.4% 


13 


13.3% 




98 


188.2 


135.5 


49 


68.1% 


15 


20.8% 


8 


11.1% 




72 


149.3 


78.5 


88 


56.8% 


41 


26.5% 


26 


16.8% 




155 


197.3 


139.0 


40 


64.5% 


16 


25.8% 


6 


9.7% 




62 


158.5 


103.5 


305 


61.7% 


114 


23.1% 


75 


15.2% 




494 


198.6 


106.0 


884 


29.6% 


506 


16.9% 


1,601 


53.5% 


2 


,991 


529.1 


406.0 



District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 

District Totals 



149 


64.5% 


48 


20.8% 


34 


14.7% 


179 


57.2% 


77 


24.6% 


57 


18.2% 


101 


75.4% 


26 


19.4% 


7 


5.2% 



429 



63.3% 



151 



22.3% 



98 



14.5% 



231 
313 
134 

678 



174.0 
188.2 
122.7 

170.4 



109.0 

127.0 

78.0 

107.5 



District 12 




















Cumberland 


1,248 


49.1% 


517 


20.4% 


775 


30.5% 


2,540 


260.6 


196.0 


Hoke 


49 


45.8% 


15 


14.0% 


43 


40.2% 


107 


596.2 


239.0 


District Totals 


1,297 


49.0% 


532 


20.1% 


818 


30.9% 


2,647 


274.1 


196.0 


District 13 




















Bladen 


45 


71.4% 


7 


11.1% 


11 


17.5% 


63 


192.4 


88.0 


Brunswick 


115 


39.5% 


59 


20.3% 


117 


40.2% 


291 


425.4 


272.0 


Columbus 


122 


34.9% 


72 


20.6% 


156 


44.6% 


350 


389.8 


315.5 


District Totals 


282 


40.1% 


138 


19.6% 


284 


40.3% 


704 


386.9 


285.0 


District 14 


416 


43.4% 


218 


22.7% 


325 


33.9% 


959 


338.4 




Durham 


232.0 



District 15A 
Alamance 



247 



79.2% 



43 



13.8% 



22 



7.1% 



312 



113.1 



54.0 



District 15B 

Chatham 

Orange 

District Totals 

District 16 

Robeson 

Scotland 

District Totals 



41 
142 

183 



185 

95 

280 



49.4% 
41.8% 

43.3% 



74.9% 
67.9% 

72.4% 



20 



100 



33 

27 

60 



24.1% 
23.5% 

23.6% 



13.4% 
19.3% 

15.5% 



22 
118 

140 



29 

18 

47 



26.5% 
34.7% 

33.1% 



11.7% 
12.9% 

12.1% 



83 
340 

423 



247 
140 

387 



258.1 
317.1 

305.5 



139.4 
169.1 

150.2 



183.0 
221.5 

216.0 



74.0 
84.5 

78.0 



District 17A 




















Caswell 


36 


67.9% 


8 


15.1% 


9 


17.0% 


53 


180.7 


97.0 


Rockingham 


124 


68.9% 


28 


15.6% 


28 


15.6% 


180 


171.2 


77.0 


District Totals 


160 


68.7% 


36 


15.5% 


37 


15.9% 


233 


173.3 


81.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


25 


65.8% 


8 


21.1% 


5 


13.2% 


38 


188.9 


112.5 


Surry 


113 


61.7% 


30 


16.4% 


40 


21.9% 


183 


199.8 


103.0 


District Totals 


138 


62.4% 


38 


17.2% 


45 


20.4% 


221 


197.9 


105.0 



157 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 



<fr 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



6-12 



>12 



% 



Total Mean Median 

Pending Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 1! 
Guilford 



111 41.7% 307 15.8% 827 42.5% 



1,945 



403.2 266.0 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 



181 


82.3% 


22 


10.0% 


17 


7.7% 


195 


81.6% 


32 


13.4% 


12 


5.0% 



220 
239 



114.0 
111.9 



48.5 
62.0 



District Totals 



376 



81.9% 



54 



11 



29 



6.3% 



459 



122.9 



56.0 



District 1< 



Montgomery 


44 


48.9% 


18 


20.0% 


28 


31.1% 


90 


310.3 


191.5 


Randolph 


174 


70.2% 


33 


13.3% 


41 


16.5% 


248 


181.3 


82.0 


District Totals 


218 


64.5% 


51 


15.1% 


69 


20.4% 


338 


215.6 


111.0 


District 20 




















Anson 


54 


56.8% 


14 


14.7% 


27 


28.4% 


95 


239.6 


145.0 


Moore 


161 


45.9% 


64 


18.2% 


126 


35.9% 


351 


371.1 


216.0 


Richmond 


97 


68.8% 


17 


12.1% 


27 


19.1% 


141 


178.5 


61.0 


Stanly 


64 


31.1% 


20 


9.7% 


122 


59.2% 


206 


623.7 


454.5 


Union 


139 


52.7% 


54 


20.5% 


71 


26.9% 


264 


256.5 


165.0 


District Totals 


515 


48.7% 


169 


16.0% 


373 


35.3% 


1,057 


354.2 


196.0 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


679 


48.3% 


172 


12.2% 


556 


39.5% 


1,407 


382.4 


210.0 


District 22 





















Alexander 


27 


64.3% 


9 


21.4% 


6 


14.3% 


42 


186.9 


72.0 


Davidson 


232 


51.9% 


100 


22.4% 


115 


25.7% 


447 


251.0 


167.0 


Davie 


52 


73.2% 


10 


14.1% 


9 


12.7% 


71 


180.6 


96.0 


Iredell 


184 


63.7% 


58 


20.1% 


47 


16.3% 


289 


179.5 


89.0 



District Totals 



495 



58.3% 



177 



20.8% 



177 



20.8% 



849 



217.6 



126.0 



District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 



16 


94.1% 





0.0% 


1 


5.9% 


35 


58.3% 


13 


21.7% 


12 


20.0% 


93 


70.5% 


26 


19.7% 


13 


9.8% 


4 3 


61.4% 


14 


20.0% 


13 


18.6% 



17 

60 

132 

70 



89.1 
187.8 
138.7 
226.1 



62.0 

97.0 

68.5 

139.0 



District Totals 



187 



67.0% 



53 



19. 



39 



14.0% 



279 



168.2 



92.0 



District 24 



Avery 






29 


42.6% 


15 


22.1% 


24 


35.3% 


68 


350.2 


220.5 


Madison 






27 


75.0% 


6 


16.7% 


3 


8.3% 


36 


225.5 


126.0 


Mitchell 






30 


65.2% 


5 


10.9% 


11 


23.9% 


46 


250.8 


107.0 


Watauga 






62 


54.9% 


25 


22.1% 


26 


23.0% 


113 


251.2 


160.0 


Yancey 






36 


76.6% 


3 


6.4% 


8 


17.0% 


47 


161.1 


81.0 


District 


Totals 


184 


59.4% 


54 


17.4% 


72 


23.2% 


310 


256.2 


132.5 


District 


25 























-. j r /. e 
Caldwell 

Catawba 



1 V 


63.2% 


45 


21.5% 


32 


15.3% 


136 


68.3% 


27 


13.6% 


36 


18.1% 


264 


55.5% 


102 


21.4% 


110 


23.1% 



209 
199 
476 



227.4 
188.9 
214.5 



112.0 

98.0 

133.0 



District Totals 



532 



60.2% 



174 



19.7% 



178 



20.1% 



884 



21 1.{ 



i12.5 



District 26 
Mecklenburg 



1,103 



59.2% 



329 



17.7% 



430 



23.1% 



1,862 



211.5 



11 1.0 



158 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 











■fa w-^-o. V 






Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 27A 




















Gaston 


455 


62.6% 


122 


16.8% 


150 


20.6% 


727 


180.6 


98.0 


District 27B 




















Cleveland 


195 


95.6% 


8 


3.9% 


1 


0.5% 


204 


66.5 


47.5 


Lincoln 


91 


95.8% 


4 


4.2% 





0.0% 


95 


67.7 


47.0 


District Totals 


286 


95.7% 


12 


4.0% 


1 


0.3% 


299 


66.8 


47.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


547 


60.4% 


223 


24.6% 


136 


15.0% 


906 


185.2 


119.0 


District 29 




















Henderson 


127 


50.0% 


53 


20.9% 


74 


29.1% 


254 


271.0 


177.5 


McDowell 


79 


59.4% 


37 


27.8% 


17 


12.8% 


133 


197.4 


125.0 


Polk 


15 


51.7% 


4 


13.8% 


10 


34.5% 


29 


324.0 


153.0 


Rutherford 


80 


50.6% 


26 


16.5% 


52 


32.9% 


158 


384.9 


173.5 


Transylvania 


50 


39.1% 


13 


10.2% 


65 


50.8% 


128 


485.4 


396.0 


District Totals 


351 


50.0% 


133 


18.9% 


218 


31.1% 


702 


324.0 


179.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


35 


45.5% 


19 


24.7% 


23 


29.9% 


77 


341.2 


204.0 


Clay 


10 


55.6% 


2 


11.1% 


6 


33.3% 


18 


364.8 


64.5 


Graham 


23 


59.0% 


9 


23.1% 


7 


17.9% 


39 


189.7 


158.0 


Haywood 


126 


54.3% 


50 


21.6% 


56 


24.1% 


232 


258.6 


153.0 


Jackson 


46 


46.9% 


24 


24.5% 


28 


28.6% 


98 


290.3 


206.5 


Macon 


39 


51.3% 


14 


18.4% 


23 


30.3% 


76 


310.1 


172.0 


Swain 


14 


30.4% 


11 


23.9% 


21 


45.7% 


46 


379.3 


344.0 


District Totals 


293 


50.0% 


129 


22.0% 


164 


28.0% 


586 


289.6 


179.0 


State Totals 


14,920 


53.3% 


5,154 


18.4% 


7,904 


28.3% 


27,978 


286.9 


154.0 



159 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 



Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


26 


74. 3% 


7 


20.0% 


2 


5.7% 


35 


125.7 


76.0 


Chowan 


142 


86.1% 


18 


10.9% 


5 


3.0% 


165 


87.2 


42.0 


Currituck 


55 


76.4% 


8 


11.1% 


9 


12.5% 


72 


141.3 


68.0 


Dare 


125 


71.4% 


24 


13.7% 


26 


14.9% 


175 


175.8 


84.0 


Gates 


44 


71.0% 


9 


14.5% 


9 


14.5% 


62 


199.1 


66.0 


Pasquotank 


251 


80.7% 


27 


8.7% 


33 


10.6% 


311 


145.8 


66.0 


Perquimans 


70 


83.3% 


8 


9.5% 


6 


7.1% 


84 


128.8 


70.0 


District Totals 


713 


78.9% 


101 


11.2% 


90 


10.0% 


904 


141.8 


66.0 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


313 


84.9% 


17 


4.2% 


44 


10.9% 


404 


115.4 


42.0 


Hyde 


37 


72.5% 


5 


9.8% 


9 


17.6% 


51 


196.7 


57.0 


Martin 


231 


87.5% 


13 


4.9% 


20 


7.6% 


264 


156.8 


33.5 


Tyrrell 


21 


70.0% 


5 


16.7% 


4 


13.3% 


30 


176.0 


57.0 


Washington 


95 


89.6% 


3 


2.8% 


8 


7.5% 


106 


82.1 


35.0 


District Totals 


727 


85.0% 


43 


5.0% 


85 


9.9% 


855 


131.0 


40.0 


District 3 




















Carteret 


452 


81.6% 


57 


10.3% 


45 


8.1% 


554 


111.9 


62.0 


Craven 


663 


73.4% 


148 


16.4% 


92 


10.2% 


903 


141.2 


66.0 


Pamlico 


19 


64.5% 


16 


21.1% 


11 


14.5% 


76 


154.7 


68.5 


Pitt 


607 


81.3% 


98 


13.1% 


42 


5.6% 


747 


105.7 


55.0 



District Totals 1,771 77.7% 319 14.0% 190 8.3% 

District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 

District Totals 2,147 66.8% 314 9.8% 753 23.4% 

District 5 



318 


77.9% 


52 


12.7% 


38 


9.3% 


27 


55.1% 


4 


8.2% 


18 


36.7% 


,309 


61.3% 


198 


9.3% 


627 


29.4% 


493 


79.1% 


60 


9.6% 


70 


11.2% 



2,280 



408 

49 

2,134 

623 

3,214 



District Totals 1 ,283 
District 7 



81.2% 



208 



13.2% 



90 



5.7% 



1,581 



122.9 



137.6 
642.5 
343.5 
136.2 

281.8 



100.4 



60.5 



54.0 

120.0 

97.0 

49.0 

78.0 



New Hanover 


1,213 


75.7% 


139 


8.7% 


251 


15.7% 


1,603 


171.9 


63.0 


Pender 


214 


75.6% 


42 


14.8% 


27 


9.5% 


283 


130.5 


66.0 


District Totals 


1 ,427 


75.7% 


181 


9.6% 


278 


14.7% 


1,886 


165.7 


63.0 


District 6 




















Bertie 


202 


73.2% 


40 


14.5% 


34 


12.3% 


276 


131.8 


61.5 


Halifax 


663 


87.7% 


70 


9.3% 


23 


3.0% 


756 


80.6 


54.0 


Hertford 


265 


72.6% 


72 


19.7% 


28 


7.7% 


365 


122.9 


56.0 


Northampton 


153 


83.2% 


26 


14.1% 


5 


2.7% 


184 


89.7 


56.0 



55.0 



Edgecombe 


502 


84.9% 


56 


9.5% 


33 


5.6% 


591 


94.8 


47.0 


Nash 


597 


84.3% 


63 


8.9% 


48 


6.8% 


708 


108.2 


54.0 


Wilson 


515 


80.5% 


64 


10.0% 


61 


9.5% 


640 


122.2 


51.0 


District Totals 


1,614 


83.2% 


183 


9.4% 


142 


7.3% 


1,939 


108.7 


51.0 


District 8 




















C-reene 


121 


82.3% 


18 


12.2% 


8 


5.4% 


147 


88.7 


42.0 


Lenoir 


488 


68.9% 


109 


15.4% 


111 


15.7% 


708 


160.7 


67.0 


Wayne 


1,170 


83.8% 


111 


7.9% 


116 


8.3% 


1,397 


101 .1 


50.0 



District Totals 1 ,779 



79.0% 



238 



10.6% 



235 



10.4% 



2,252 



119.0 



55.0 



160 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 9 




















Franklin 


232 


78. 1% 


37 


12.5% 


28 


9.4% 


297 


126.6 


49.0 


Granville 


242 


73.8% 


61 


18.6% 


25 


7.6% 


328 


127.7 


59.0 


Person 


245 


86.3% 


23 


8.1% 


16 


5.6% 


284 


83.5 


41.0 


Vance 


371 


79.3% 


47 


10.0% 


50 


10.7% 


468 


123.5 


43.0 


Warren 


152 


72.4% 


29 


13.8% 


29 


13.8% 


210 


139.0 


57.5 


District Totals 


1,242 


78.3% 


197 


12.4% 


148 


9.3% 


1,587 


119.8 


48.0 


District 10 




















Wake 


2,644 


83.3% 


139 


4.4% 


391 


12.3% 


3,174 


188.9 


48.0 


District 11 




















Harnett 


485 


78.9% 


103 


16.7% 


27 


4.4% 


615 


100.5 


53.0 


Johnston 


706 


83.1% 


71 


8.4% 


73 


8.6% 


850 


107.3 


48.0 


Lee 


477 


84.3% 


67 


11.8% 


22 


3.9% 


566 


77.8 


41.0 


District Totals 


1,668 


82.1% 


241 


11.9% 


122 


6.0% 


2,031 


97.0 


48.0 


District 12 




















Cumberland 


3,198 


73.1% 


467 


10.7% 


707 


16.2% 


4,372 


170.8 


70.0 


Hoke 


186 


88.6% 


10 


4.8% 


14 


6.7% 


210 


84.5 


17.0 



District Totals 3,384 



73.9% 



477 



10.4% 



721 



15.7% 



4,582 



166.9 



68.0 



District 13 




















Bladen 


284 


95.9% 


8 


2.7% 


4 


1.4% 


296 


44.4 


2.5 


Brunswick 


393 


91.0% 


21 


4.9% 


18 


4.2% 


432 


86.4 


51.0 


Columbus 


444 


85.5% 


45 


8.7% 


30 


5.8% 


519 


99.0 


50.0 


District Totals 


1,121 


89.9% 


74 


5.9% 


52 


4.2% 


1,247 


81.7 


45.0 


District 14 




















Durham 


1,330 


74.0% 


152 


8.5% 


315 


17.5% 


1,797 


192.4 


63.0 


District 15A 




















Alamance 


981 


91.4% 


50 


4.7% 


42 


3.9% 


1,073 


81.8 


49.0 


District 15B 




















Chatham 


198 


70.0% 


20 


7.1% 


65 


23.0% 


283 


181.3 


53.0 


Orange 


411 


90.1% 


29 


6.4% 


16 


3.5% 


456 


89.3 


55.0 


District Totals 


609 


82.4% 


49 


6.6% 


81 


11.0% 


739 


124.5 


55.0 


District 16 




















Robeson 


1,033 


82.3% 


100 


8.0% 


122 


9.7% 


1,255 


101.8 


36.0 


Scotland 


269 


82.0% 


29 


8.8% 


30 


9.1% 


328 


109.5 


42.0 



District Totals 1 ,302 



82.2% 



129 



8.1% 



152 



9.6% 



1,583 



103.4 



38.0 



District 17A 

Caswell 119 76.8% 25 16.1% 11 

Rockingham 681 77.8% 104 11.9% 90 

District Totals 800 77.7% 129 12.5% 101 



7.1% 
10.3% 



155 
875 

1,030 



123.5 
116.3 

117.4 



49.0 
48.0 

48.0 



District 17B 




















Stokes 


129 


73.3% 


25 


14.2% 


22 


12.5% 


176 


130.8 


74.5 


Surry 


469 


83.0% 


35 


6.2% 


61 


10.8% 


565 


124.2 


48.0 



District Totals 



598 



.7% 



60 



8.1% 



83 



11.2% 



741 



125.8 



52.0 



161 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 



Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 


18 




















Guilford 




3,231 


89.55 


190 


5.4% 


182 


5.0% 


3,609 


88.5 


48.0 


District 


19A 




















Cabarrus 




837 


80.91 


6S 


6.3? 


133 


12.9% 


1,035 


138.9 


47.0 


Rowan 




772 


84.61 


79 


8. 71 


61 


6.7% 


912 


101.0 


50.0 



District Totals 1 ,609 



82.6% 



144 



7.4% 



194 



10.0% 



1,947 



121.1 



49.0 



District 19B 




















Montgomery 


171 


83.0% 


18 


8.7% 


17 


8.3% 


206 


108.9 


58.0 


Randolph 


566 


77.1% 


89 


12.1% 


79 


10.8% 


734 


129.9 


52.0 


District Totals 


737 


78.4% 


107 


11.4% 


96 


10.2% 


940 


125.3 


53.5 


District 20 




















Anson 


215 


84.3% 


15 


5.9% 


25 


9.8% 


255 


131.9 


42.0 


Moore 


466 


85.2% 


43 


7.9% 


38 


6.9% 


547 


145.3 


60.0 


Richmond 


404 


76.7% 


39 


7.4% 


84 


15.9% 


527 


166.4 


53.0 


Stanly 


316 


92.4% 


15 


4.4% 


11 


3.2% 


342 


70.0 


39.5 


Union 


465 


68.6% 


36 


5.3% 


177 


26.1% 


678 


236.7 


60.0 


District Totals 


1,866 


79.4% 


148 


6.3% 


335 


14.3% 


2,349 


164.0 


53.0 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


2,167 


86.9% 


191 


7.7% 


135 


5.4% 


2,493 


108.7 


61.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 


192 


85.0% 


22 


9.7% 


12 


5.3% 


226 


94.5 


45.5 


Davidson 


737 


81 .2% 


61 


6.7% 


110 


12.1% 


908 


128.7 


56.0 


Davie 


176 


76.5% 


24 


10.4% 


30 


13.0% 


230 


156.6 


55.5 


Iredell 


667 


84.0% 


76 


9.6% 


51 


6.4% 


794 


98.3 


46.5 


District Totals 


1,772 


82.1% 


183 


8.5% 


203 


9.4% 


2,158 


116.9 


50.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


69 


85.2% 


7 


8.6% 


5 


6.2% 


81 


92.7 


46.0 


Ashe 


143 


89.4% 


9 


5.6% 


8 


5.0% 


160 


75.4 


13.5 


Wilkes 


459 


87.6% 


43 


8.2% 


22 


4.2% 


524 


79.9 


41.0 


Yadkin 


152 


79.2% 


24 


12.5% 


16 


8.3% 


192 


118.1 


53.0 



District Totals 



823 



86.0% 



83 



8.7% 



51 



5.3% 



957 



87.9 



43.0 



District 24 



Avery 


71 


61.2% 


18 


14.9% 


29 


24.0% 


121 


248.8 


110.0 


Madison 


66 


73.3% 


4 


4.4% 


20 


22.2% 


90 


261.7 


64.0 


Mitchell 


89 


89.0% 


8 


8.0% 


3 


3.0% 


100 


83.8 


57.5 


Watauga 


189 


75.6% 


35 


14.0% 


26 


10.4% 


250 


149.3 


77.0 


Yancey 


89 


78.8% 


22 


19.5% 


2 


1.8% 


113 


103.2 


58.0 


District Totals 


507 


75.2% 


87 


12.9% 


80 


11.9% 


674 


164.7 


68.0 


District 25 




















Burke 


644 


73.3? 


1 10 


12.5% 


124 


14.1% 


878 


182.2 


48.0 


Caldwell 


537 


77.8% 


76 


1 1 .0% 


77 


11 .2% 


690 


145.7 


49.0 


Catawba 


1,062 


78.3% 


87 


6.4% 


208 


15.3? 


1,357 


151.5 


49.0 


District Totals 


2,243 


76.7% 


273 


9.3% 


409 


14.0% 


2,925 


159.3 


49.0 


District 26 





















" '■- '- /. . '-. ' .'. i r .-; 



4,427 



99.8% 



305 



6.3% 



141 



2.< 



4,873 



74.9 



49.0 



162 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



6-12 



>12 



Total Mean Median 
Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 27A 
Gaston 



2,012 



153 



101 



4.5% 



2,266 



79.2 



42.0 



District 27B 

Cleveland 

Lincoln 



District Totals 1 ,252 



862 


85.1% 


135 


13.3% 


16 


1.6% 


390 


88.0% 


51 


11.5% 


2 


0.5% 



District 
Buncombe 



_2£ 



1,482 



86.0% 



75.! 



186 



342 



12.8% 



17.5% 



130 



1.2% 



6.7% 



1,013 
443 

1,456 
1,954 



79.7 
80.4 

79.9 
122.3 



45.0 
50.0 

46.0 



59.0 



District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 



District Totals 1 ,364 



District 30 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 

Macon 

Swain 

District Totals 

State Totals 



435 


74.1% 


66 


11.2% 


86 


14.7% 


249 


74.3% 


42 


12.5% 


44 


13.1% 


45 


86.5% 


2 


3.8% 


5 


9.6% 


438 


76.8% 


28 


4.9% 


104 


18.2% 


197 


68.2% 


19 


6.6% 


73 


25.3% 



74.4% 



157 



312 



17.0% 



125 


82.2% 


20 


13.2% 


7 


4.6% 


25 


69.4% 


4 


11.1% 


7 


19.4% 


55 


80.9% 


11 


16.2% 


2 


2.9% 


319 


68.8% 


60 


12.9% 


85 


18.3% 


137 


74.9% 


37 


20.2% 


9 


4.9% 


128 


69.9% 


22 


12.0% 


33 


18.0% 


71 


73.2% 


17 


17.5% 


9 


9.3% 


860 


72.7% 


171 


14.5% 


152 


12.8% 


492 


80.9% 


6,010 


9.1% 


6,610 


10.0% 



587 
335 
52 
570 
289 

1,833 



152 

36 

68 

464 

183 

183 

97 

1,183 

66,112 



158.0 
145.3 
114.8 
181.5 
259.0 

177.7 



108.6 
201.7 
103.0 
201.7 
131.3 
192.6 
160.8 

168.4 
133.1 



58.0 
52.0 
47.0 
55.5 
59.0 

56.0 



57.5 
78.0 
71.5 
68.5 
70.0 
68.0 
59.0 

67.0 

53.0 



163 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


9 


69. 2% 


1 


7.7% 


3 


23.1% 


13 


332.2 


190.0 


Chowan 


33 


57.9% 


12 


21.1% 


12 


21.1% 


57 


423.2 


259.0 


Currituck 


31 


50.8% 


16 


26.2% 


14 


23.0% 


61 


323.5 


260.0 


Dare 


61 


52.5% 


43 


35.2% 


15 


12.3% 


122 


288.1 


264.0 


Gates 


7 


63.6% 


2 


18.2% 


2 


18.2% 


11 


285.3 


146.0 


Pasquotank 


67 


68.4% 


21 


21.4% 


10 


10.2% 


98 


238.1 


158.0 


Perquimans 


11 


32.4% 


10 


29.4% 


13 


38.2% 


34 


511.4 


368.0 


District Totals 


222 


56.1% 


105 


26.5% 


69 


17.4% 


396 


321.2 


229.5 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


36 


65.6% 


30 


22.9% 


15 


11.5% 


131 


295.6 


195.0 


Hyde 


14 


66.7% 


3 


14.3% 


4 


19.0% 


21 


307.5 


116.0 


Martin 


13 


39.4% 


6 


18.2% 


14 


42.4% 


33 


600.1 


473.0 


Tyrrell 


3 


18.8% 


9 


56.3% 


4 


25.0% 


16 


453.3 


424.5 


Washington 


13 


68.4% 


2 


10.5% 


4 


21.1% 


19 


272.4 


109.0 


District Totals 


129 


58.6% 


50 


22.7% 


41 


18.6% 


220 


351.9 


214.0 


District 3 




















Carteret 


114 


78.1% 


27 


18.5% 


5 


3.4% 


146 


165.0 


104.5 


Craven 


216 


85.7% 


29 


11.5% 


7 


2.8% 


252 


149.6 


103.5 


Pamlico 


11 


91.7% 


1 


8.3% 





0.0% 


12 


99.3 


81.0 


Pitt 


273 


90.7% 


26 


8.6% 


2 


0.7% 


301 


105.7 


61.0 


District Totals 


611 


86.4% 


83 


11.7% 


14 


2.0% 


711 


133.4 


84.0 


District 4 




















Duplin 


53 


57.0% 


25 


26.9% 


15 


16.1% 


93 


320.0 


238.0 


Jones 


29 


54.7% 


12 


22.6% 


12 


22.6% 


53 


420.1 


134.0 


Onslow 


335 


48.1% 


113 


16.2% 


248 


35.6% 


696 


448.6 


293.0 


Sampson 


83 


65.4% 


27 


21.3% 


17 


13.4% 


127 


269.7 


138.0 


District Totals 


500 


51.6% 


177 


18.3% 


292 


30.1% 


969 


411.3 


250.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


602 


65.3% 


176 


19.1% 


144 


15.6% 


922 


263.2 


158.5 


Pender 


61 


71.8% 


10 


11.8% 


14 


16.5% 


85 


339.8 


131.0 


District Totals 


663 


65.8% 


186 


18.5% 


158 


15.7% 


1,007 


269.6 


155.0 


District 6 




















Bertie 


35 


76.1% 


9 


19.6% 


2 


4.3% 


46 


173.1 


126.0 


Halifax 


65 


84.4% 


10 


13.0% 


2 


2.6% 


77 


141.7 


104.0 


Hertford 


67 


91.8% 


4 


5.5% 


2 


2.7% 


73 


123.3 


92.0 


Northampton 


24 


92.3% 





0.0% 


2 


7.7% 


26 


113.9 


38.0 


District Totals 


191 


86.0% 


23 


10.4% 


8 


3.6% 


222 


138.9 


92.0 


District 7 




















Edgecombe 


66 


63.5% 


20 


19.2% 


18 


17.3% 


104 


334.6 


156.5 


Nash 


175 


73.2% 


49 


20.5% 


15 


6.3% 


239 


200.6 


113.0 


Wil3on 


107 


73.3% 


19 


13.0% 


20 


13.7% 


146 


293.3 


115.0 


District Totals 


348 


71.2% 


88 


18.0% 


53 


10.8% 


489 


256.8 


124.0 


District 8 




















Greene 


13 


81.3% 


3 


18.8% 





0.0% 


16 


138.1 


132.5 


Lenoir 


162 


73.3% 


48 


21.7% 


11 


5.0% 


221 


183.4 


131.0 


Wayne 


295 


64.6% 


134 


29.3% 


28 


6.1% 


457 


222.0 


167.0 



District Total3 



470 



67.7% 



185 



26.7% 



39 



694 



207.8 



156.5 



164 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 

District Totals 

District 10 
Wake 



District 11 
Harnett 
Johnston 
Lee 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 















Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 


<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


47 


60.3% 


19 


24.4% 


12 


15.4% 


78 


352.5 


171.0 


36 


90.0% 


3 


7.5% 


1 


2.5% 


40 


146.3 


105.5 


67 


75.3% 


10 


11.2% 


12 


13.5% 


89 


247.4 


85.0 


87 


73.1% 


24 


20.2% 


8 


6.7% 


119 


202.9 


110.0 


30 


83.3% 


4 


11.1% 


2 


5.6% 


36 


164.6 


111.0 


267 


73.8% 


60 


16.6% 


35 


9.7% 


362 


236.0 


113.0 


735 


66.7% 


962 


23.5% 


405 


9.9% 


4,102 


243.3 


140.5 


179 


88.2% 


21 


10.3% 


3 


1.5% 


203 


117.4 


77.0 


217 


70.0% 


90 


29.0% 


3 


1.0% 


310 


189.9 


146.0 


127 


83.6% 


21 


13.8% 


4 


2.6% 


152 


144.5 


78.0 



District Totals 



523 



78.6% 



132 



19.8% 



10 



1.5% 



665 



157.4 



103.0 



District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 



District Totals 



559 
25 

584 



63.5% 
52.1% 

62.9% 



185 

4 



21.0% 
8.3% 

20.4% 



136 

19 

155 



15.5% 
39.6% 

16.7% 



48 
928 



268.0 
614.5 

285.9 



180.0 
221.5 

181.0 



District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 

District Totals 

District 14 
Durham 



57 
204 
158 

419 
633 



41.3% 
35.2% 
35.5% 

36.1% 



48.0% 



35 
138 
111 

284 



395 



25.4% 
23.8% 
24.9% 

24.4% 



29.9% 



46 
237 
176 

459 



291 



33.3% 
40.9% 
39.6% 

39.5% 



22.1% 



138 
579 
445 

1,162 



1,319 



414.4 
550.7 
456.1 

498.3 



364.9 



392.0 
418.0 
427.0 

413.0 



288.0 



District 15A 
Alamance 



219 



69.5% 



82 



26.0% 



14 



4.4% 



315 



200.1 



148.0 



District 1 5B 

Chatham 

Orange 

District Totals 

District 16 



43 
231 

274 



81.1% 
56.9% 

59.7% 



96 
104 



15.1% 
23.6% 

22.7% 



2 
79 



3.8% 
19.5% 

17.6% 



Stokes 
Surry 



60 
110 



78.9% 
79.1% 



13 
25 



17.1', 



53 
406 

459 



179.4 
290.7 

277.9 



130.0 
208.0 

194.0 



Robeson 


281 


59.5% 


129 


27.3% 


62 


13.1% 


472 


266.6 


182.0 


Scotland 


69 


72.6% 


16 


16.8% 


10 


10.5% 


95 


206.3 


132.0 


District Totals 


350 


61.7% 


145 


25.6% 


72 


12.7% 


567 


256.5 


166.0 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


12 


48.0% 


7 


28.0% 


6 


24.0% 


25 


326.1 


284.0 


Rockingham 


90 


86.5% 


12 


11.5% 


2 


1.9% 


104 


120.8 


74.5 


District Totals 


102 


79.1% 


19 


14.7% 


8 


6.2% 


129 


160.6 


84.0 


District 17B 





















3 


3.9% 


76 


158.5 


102.5 


4 


2.9% 


139 


160.4 


98.0 



District Totals 



170 



79.1% 



38 



17.7% 



3.3% 



215 



159.8 



165 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 



Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



9-18 



% 



>11 



Total Mean Median 

Pending Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 18 
Guilford 



1,679 51. 1% 831 25.3% 776 23.65 



3,286 



337.7 



258.0 



District 19A 














Cabarrus 


291 


83.4% 


44 


12.6% 


14 


4.0% 


Rowan 


260 


85.0% 


42 


13.7% 


4 


1.3% 


District Totals 


551 


84.1% 


86 


13.1% 


18 


2.7% 


District 19B 














Montgomery 


33 


50.3% 


42 


24.0% 


45 


25.7% 


Randolph 


10b 


77.4% 


26 


19.0% 


5 


3.6% 


District Totals 


191 


62.2% 


68 


21.8% 


50 


16.0% 


District 20 














Anson 


36 


43.4% 


21 


25.3% 


26 


31.3% 


Moore 


15b 


31.8% 


85 


17.3% 


250 


50.9% 


Richmond 


71 


61.2% 


22 


19.0% 


23 


19.8% 


Stanly 


91 


28.3% 


46 


14.3% 


184 


57.3% 


Union 


194 


48.0% 


103 


25.5% 


107 


26.5% 


District Totals 


548 


38.7% 


277 


19.6% 


590 


41.7% 


District 21 














Forsyth 


1,127 


57.2% 


365 


18.5% 


477 


24.2% 


District 22 














Alexander 


33 


94.3% 


2 


5.7% 





0.0% 


Davidson 


243 


75.7% 


60 


18.7% 


18 


5.6% 


Davie 


42 


68.9% 


1 1 


18.0% 


8 


13.1% 


Iredell 


207 


68.1% 


83 


27.3% 


14 


4.6% 


District Totals 


525 


72.8% 


156 


21.6% 


40 


5.5% 


District 23 














Alleghany 


Vi 


73.1% 


7 


26.9% 





0.0% 


Ashe 


1*> 


69.2% 


11 


21.2% 


5 


9.6% 


Wilkes 


263 


81.4% 


51 


15.8% 


9 


2.8% 


Yadkin 


55 


63.2% 


9 


10.3% 


23 


26.4% 


District Totals 


373 


76.4% 


78 


16.0% 


37 


7.6% 


District 24 














Avery 


77 


67.0% 


24 


20.9% 


14 


12.2% 


Madison 


7 


25.9% 


14 


51.9% 


6 


22.2% 


Mitchell 


28 


28.6% 


70 


71.4% 





0.0% 


Watauga 


104 


78.8% 


21 


15.9% 


7 


5.3% 


Yancey 


14 


73.7% 


4 


21.1% 


1 


5.3% 


District Totals 


230 


58.8% 


133 


34.0% 


28 


7.2% 


District 25 














Burke 


148 


92.5% 


Vi 


6.3% 


2 


1.3% 


Caldwell 


133 


83.1% 


23 


14.4% 


4 


2.5% 


Z a t a » -, h 


274 


74.1% 


85 


23.0% 


1 1 


3.0% 


District Totals 


555 


80.4% 


118 


17.1% 


17 


2.5% 


District 26 














Mecklenburg 


3,292 


70.1% 


1,079 


23.0% 


324 


6.9% 



349 
306 

655 



175 
137 

312 



83 

491 
116 
321 
404 

1,415 



1,969 



35 
321 

61 
304 

721 



2J> 

52 

323 

87 

488 



115 
27 
98 

1 12 

19 

391 



160 

1MJ 

370 

690 



4,695 



162.7 
139.4 

151.8 



389.6 
162.9 

290.1 



422.1 
573.0 
304.6 
905.7 
341.3 

551.5 



364.0 



91.7 
171.0 
238.7 
202.0 

185.9 



144.1 
212.3 
152.3 
462.1 

213.5 



255.7 
383.9 
333.6 
181.0 
219.2 

257.1 



114.5 
160.0 
193.0 

167.1 



207.6 



127.0 
119.0 

123.0 



259.0 
91.0 

151.0 



314.0 
594.0 
157.5 
714.0 
286.0 

410.0 



221.0 



33.0 

95.0 

98.0 

163.5 

112.0 



82.5 
101.0 

99.0 
116.0 

99.0 



120.0 
349.0 
435.0 
130.0 
140.0 

167.0 



75.5 
106.0 
135.0 

106.0 



151.0 



1 66 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 

















Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 27A 




















Gaston 


250 


78.6% 


56 


17.6% 


12 


3.8% 


318 


179.8 


136.0 


District 27B 




















Cleveland 


82 


96.5% 


3 


3.5% 





0.0% 


85 


77.6 


57.0 


Lincoln 


60 


95.2% 


3 


4.8% 





0.0% 


63 


96.5 


60.0 


District Totals 


142 


95.9% 


6 


4.1% 





0.0% 


148 


85.6 


57.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


609 


82.4% 


117 


15.8% 


13 


1.8% 


739 


153.5 


113.0 


District 29 




















Henderson 


37 


41.6% 


70 


33.5% 


52 


24.9% 


209 


363.3 


337.0 


McDowell 


52 


80.0% 


12 


18.5% 


1 


1.5% 


65 


152.8 


112.0 


Polk 


13 


44.8% 


8 


27.6% 


8 


27.6% 


29 


388.5 


314.0 


Rutherford 


41 


55.4% 


19 


25.7% 


14 


18.9% 


74 


332.7 


242.5 


Transylvania 


68 


48.6% 


40 


28.6% 


32 


22.9% 


140 


389.2 


292.0 


District Totals 


261 


50.5% 


149 


28.8% 


107 


20.7% 


517 


340.9 


267.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


12 


60.0% 


7 


35.0% 


1 


5.0% 


20 


202.7 


153.5 


Clay 


5 


55.6% 





0.0% 


4 


44.4% 


9 


363.1 


236.0 


Graham 


6 


37.5% 


6 


37.5% 


4 


25.0% 


16 


362.3 


405.0 


Haywood 


93 


69.4% 


29 


21.6% 


12 


9.0% 


134 


254.4 


198.0 


Jackson 


41 


78.8% 


4 


7.7% 


7 


13.5% 


52 


243.8 


130.0 


Macon 


37 


66.1% 


12 


21.4% 


7 


12.5% 


56 


245.4 


102.0 


Swain 


10 


32.3% 


15 


48.4% 


6 


19.4% 


31 


466.8 


314.0 


District Totals 


204 


64.2% 


73 


23.0% 


41 


12.9% 


318 


277.0 


195.0 


State Totals 


19,953 


63.2% 


6,899 


21.8% 


4,741 


15.0% 


31,593 


280.1 


167.0 



167 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 

District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 















Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 


<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


6 


66. 7* 


1 


11.1% 


2 


22.2% 


9 


296.1 


155.0 


72 


75.8% 


15 


15.8% 


8 


8.4% 


95 


224.3 


213.0 


49 


74. 2% 


14 


21.2% 


3 


4.5% 


66 


190.7 


158.5 


106 


65. 4% 


32 


19.8% 


24 


14.8% 


162 


250.7 


149.5 


17 


77.3% 


5 


22.7% 





0.0% 


22 


158.2 


70.5 


115 


72.31 


18 


11.3% 


26 


16.4% 


159 


216.7 


109.0 


12 


32. nj 


20 


54.1% 


5 


13.5% 


37 


371.9 


397.0 



377 



68.5% 



105 



19.1% 



68 



12.4% 



95 


64.2% 


32 


21.6% 


21 


14.2% 


14 


48.3% 


5 


17.2% 


10 


34.5% 


46 


74.2% 


6 


9.7% 


10 


16.1% 


10 


71.4% 


1 


7.1% 


3 


21.4% 


56 


83.6% 


7 


10.4% 


4 


6.0% 



221 



69.1% 



51 



15.9% 



48 



15.0% 



550 



148 

29 
62 
14 
67 

320 



234.3 



266.2 
476.6 
325.8 
448.5 
168.6 

284.4 



145.5 



133.5 
276.0 
105.5 
115.5 
95.0 

125.5 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 



District Totals 1,458 

District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 

District Totals 



171 


75.0% 


49 


21.5% 


8 


3.5% 


652 


85.0% 


98 


12.8% 


17 


2.2% 


23 


60.5% 


13 


34.2% 


2 


5.3% 


612 


88.3% 


72 


10.4% 


9 


1.3% 



825 



84.5% 



68.0% 



232 



13.4% 



168 



13.8% 



4 9 


79.0% 


11 


17.7% 


149 


81.4% 


30 


16.4% 


136 


66.0% 


61 


29.6% 


40 


90.9% 


3 


6.8% 



871 



74.1% 



203 



17.3% 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 

District Totals 



36 



221 



101 



2.1% 



104 


70.3% 


27 


18.2% 


17 


11.5% 


45 


83.3% 


7 


13.0% 


2 


3.7% 


376 


55.8% 


108 


16.0% 


190 


28.2% 


300 


88.8% 


26 


7.7% 


12 


3.6% 



18.2% 



,270 


70.0% 


302 


16.6% 


242 


13.3% 


133 


77.3% 


22 


12.8% 


17 


9.9% 



District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 



District Totals 1,403 70.6% 324 16.3% 259 13.0% 

District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 

District Totals 374 75.6% 105 21.2% 16 



District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 

District Totals 



2 


3.2% 


4 


2.2% 


9 


4.4% 


1 


2.3% 



3.2% 



207 


76.1% 


53 


19.5% 


12 


4.4% 


378 


76.7% 


84 


17.0% 


31 


6.3% 


2V, 


69.8% 


66 


16.1% 


58 


14.1% 



8.6% 



19 


76.0% 


6 


24.0% 





0.0% 


332 


64.1% 


152 


29.3% 


34 


6.6% 


464 


59.6% 


261 


33.5% 


53 


6.8% 



315 



61.7% 



419 



31.7% 



87 



6.6% 



228 

767 

38 

693 

1,726 



148 

54 

674 

338 

1,214 



1,814 
172 

1,986 



62 
183 
206 

44 

495 



272 
493 
410 

1,175 



25 

518 
778 

1,321 



180.8 
144.0 
230.9 
140.4 

149.3 



245.6 
151.4 
452.2 
113.0 

319.2 



256.1 
227.3 

253.6 



162.4 
166.3 
216.3 
127.7 

183.2 



189.9 
202.2 
302.1 

234.2 



187.2 
210.6 
237.6 

226.1 



127.5 

94.0 

176.0 

101.0 

103.5 



106.5 
94.0 

209.0 
46.5 

107.5 



143.0 
94.0 

140.0 



111.0 

121.0 

184.0 

86.0 

125.0 



110.0 
93.0 
99.5 

102.0 



151.0 
124.0 
144.0 

137.0 



168 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 



Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



% 



9-18 



% 



>18 



% 



Total Mean Median 

Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 9 

Franklin 52 

Granville 89 

Person 83 

Vance 1 1 1 

Warren 47 

District Totals 382 

District 10 

Wake 3,960 



2% 
8% 



61 
71 
72.8% 
66.9% 
69. U 

68. 6% 



79.3% 



20 
22 
21 
40 
16 

119 
439 



23.5% 
17.7% 
18.4% 
24.1% 
23.5% 

21.4% 



13 
13 
10 
15 
5 

56 



597 



15.3% 

10.5% 

8.8% 

9.0% 

7.4% 

10.1% 



11.9% 



85 
124 
114 

166 
68 

557 



4,996 



296.3 
234.4 
220.0 
215.1 
223.4 

233.8 



188.0 



197.0 
172.0 
132.5 
130.5 
183.0 

159.0 



92.0 



District 11 














Harnett 


338 


84.1% 


60 


14.9% 


4 


1.0% 


Johnston 


435 


81.6% 


88 


16.5% 


10 


1.9% 


Lee 


302 


81.6% 


58 


15.7% 


10 


2.7% 


District Totals 


1,075 


82.4% 


206 


15.8% 


24 


1.8% 


District 12 














Cumberland 


904 


71.9% 


153 


12.2% 


201 


16.0% 


Hoke 


92 


83.6% 


15 


13.6% 


3 


2.7% 


District Totals 


996 


72.8% 


168 


12.3% 


204 


14.9% 


District 13 














Bladen 


226 


87.3% 


27 


10.4% 


6 


2.3% 


Brunswick 


326 


72.4% 


72 


16.0% 


52 


11.6% 


Columbus 


199 


73.2% 


32 


11.8% 


41 


15.1% 


District Totals 


751 


76.6% 


131 


13.4% 


99 


10.1% 


District 14 















Durham 




District 


15A 


Alamance 




District 


15B 



1,021 



394 



66.6% 



79.6% 



152 



46 



9.9% 



9.3% 



361 



55 



23.5% 



11.1% 



402 
533 
370 

1,305 



1,258 
110 

1,368 



259 
450 
272 

981 
1,534 

495 



146.7 
142.2 
170.1 

151.5 



227.2 
147.1 

220.8 



117.1 
223.2 
238.9 

199.5 



294.7 



181.4 



106.0 

77.0 

140.5 

94.0 



112.0 
87.0 

109.0 



62.0 
104.5 
116.0 

91.0 
153.0 

91.0 



Chatham 


48 


59.3% 


23 


28.4% 


10 


12.3% 


81 


273.1 


197.0 


Orange 


307 


80.8% 


58 


15.3% 


15 


3.9% 


380 


173.5 


103.0 


District Totals 


355 


77.0% 


81 


17.6% 


25 


5.4% 


461 


191.0 


108.0 


District 16 




















Robeson 


569 


75.2% 


110 


14.5% 


78 


10.3% 


757 


208.4 


77.0 


Scotland 


120 


71.9% 


34 


20.4% 


13 


7.8% 


167 


223.1 


99.0 


District Totals 


689 


74.6% 


144 


15.6% 


91 


9.8% 


924 


211.1 


82.0 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


50 


79.4% 


4 


6.3% 


9 


14.3% 


63 


211.4 


130.0 


Rockingham 


324 


76.2% 


88 


20.7% 


13 


3.1% 


425 


177.1 


119.0 


District Totals 


374 


76.6% 


92 


18.9% 


22 


4.5% 


488 


181.6 


121.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


91 


84.3% 


16 


14.8% 


1 


0.9% 


108 


138.0 


77.0 


Surry 


245 


71.8% 


74 


21.7% 


22 


6.5% 


341 


190.0 


101.0 



District Totals 



336 



74.8% 



90 



20.0% 



23 



5.1% 



449 



177.5 



89.0 



169 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 



Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



9-18 



<"r 



18 



Total Mean Median 

Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 18 
Guilford 



2,597 



79.4% 



342 



10.5% 



333 



10.2% 



3,272 



176.4 



85.0 



District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


385 


63.2% 


95 


15.6% 


129 


21.2% 


609 


277.6 


170.0 


Rowan 


488 


68.6% 


201 


28.3% 


22 


3.1% 


711 


218.8 


189.0 


District Totals 


873 


66.1% 


296 


22.4% 


151 


11.4% 


1,320 


245.9 


183.0 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 


210 


91.3% 


14 


6.1% 


6 


2.6% 


230 


125.9 


83.5 


Randolph 


280 


84.3% 


36 


10.8% 


16 


4.8% 


332 


135.6 


64.5 


District Totals 


490 


87.2% 


50 


8.9% 


22 


3.9% 


562 


131.6 


71.0 


District 20 




















Anson 


63 


63.0% 


16 


16.0% 


21 


21.0% 


100 


315.8 


185.5 


Moore 


147 


60.5% 


31 


12.8% 


65 


26.7% 


243 


432.3 


202.0 


Richmond 


121 


42.3% 


59 


20.1% 


110 


37.5% 


293 


404.9 


395.0 


Stanly 


181 


91.9% 


11 


5.6% 


5 


2.5% 


197 


125.3 


70.0 


Union 


184 


53.3% 


51 


14.8% 


110 


31.9% 


345 


387.6 


228.0 


District Totals 


699 


59.3% 


168 


14.3% 


311 


26.4% 


1,178 


351.1 


184.5 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


2,050 


80.0% 


348 


13.6% 


166 


6.5% 


2,564 


182.8 


99.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 


92 


86.0% 


12 


11.2% 


3 


2.8% 


107 


127.0 


72.0 


Davidson 


348 


72.8% 


101 


21.1% 


29 


6.1% 


478 


187.8 


86.5 


Davie 


79 


59.0% 


29 


21.6% 


26 


19.4% 


134 


272.4 


176.0 


Iredell 


649 


89.6% 


62 


8.6% 


13 


1.8% 


724 


121.4 


73.0 


District Totals 


1,168 


80.9% 


204 


14.1% 


71 


4.9% 


1,443 


157.9 


78.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


59 


80.8% 


11 


15.1% 


3 


4.1% 


73 


169.0 


133.0 


Ashe 


59 


76.6% 


14 


18.2% 


4 


5.2% 


77 


179.0 


94.0 


Wilkes 


505 


83.5% 


81 


13.4% 


19 


3.1% 


605 


150.1 


79.0 


Yadkin 


116 


84.1% 


12 


8.7% 


10 


7.2% 


138 


172.7 


97.5 


District Totals 


739 


82.8% 


118 


13.2% 


36 


4.0% 


893 


157.7 


83.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


99 


78.0% 


20 


15.7% 


8 


6.3% 


127 


190.2 


141.0 


Madison 


50 


56.8% 


21 


23.9% 


17 


19.3% 


88 


291.8 


233.0 


Mitchell 


62 


82.7% 


7 


9.3% 


6 


8.0% 


75 


171.6 


84.0 


Watauga 


300 


76.1% 


52 


13.2% 


42 


10.7% 


394 


218.9 


123.5 


Yancey 


28 


90.3% 


2 


6.5% 


1 


3.2% 


31 


150.0 


80.0 


District Totals 


539 


75.4% 


102 


14.3% 


74 


10.3% 


715 


214.8 


126.0 


District 25 




















Burke 


332 


72.3% 


77 


16.8% 


50 


10.9% 


459 


255.6 


149.0 


Caldwell 


315 


79.7% 


55 


13.9% 


25 


6.3% 


395 


172.2 


106.0 


Catawba 


527 


68.8% 


177 


23.1% 


62 


8.1% 


766 


213.5 


107.0 


District Totals 


1,174 


72.5% 


309 


19.1% 


137 


8.5% 


1,620 


215.3 


122.0 


District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


4,429 


75.3% 


86 3 


14.7% 


592 


10.1% 


5,884 


203.2 


110.0 



170 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 



<9 



Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



9-18 



>18 



Total 
Disposed 



Mean Median 

Age (Days) Age (Days) 



District 27A 
Gaston 



482 



73.1% 



108 



16.4% 



69 



10.5% 



659 



214.1 



128.0 



District 27B 



Cleveland 


252 


91.6% 


21 


7.6% 


2 


0.7% 


275 


126.2 


92.0 


Lincoln 


148 


95.5% 


7 


4.5% 





0.0% 


155 


118.9 


103.0 


District Totals 


400 


93.0% 


28 


6.5% 


2 


0.5% 


430 


123.6 


98.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


1,120 


80.3? 


250 


17.9% 


24 


1.7% 


1,394 


173.2 


135.0 


District 29 




















Henderson 


178 


56.7% 


70 


22.3% 


66 


21.0% 


314 


333.8 


189.0 


McDowell 


105 


69.5% 


31 


20.5% 


15 


9.9% 


151 


228.0 


113.0 


Polk 


35 


85.4% 


3 


7.3% 


3 


7.3% 


41 


160.7 


55.0 


Rutherford 


110 


68.8% 


32 


20.0% 


18 


11.3% 


160 


220.5 


125.5 


Transylvania 


214 


68.8% 


65 


20.9% 


32 


10.3% 


311 


237.3 


134.0 


District Totals 


642 


65.7% 


201 


20.6% 


134 


13.7% 


977 


260.9 


139.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


54 


93.1* 


3 


5.2% 


1 


1.7% 


58 


139.4 


112.5 


Clay 


28 


77.8% 


4 


11.1% 


4 


11.1% 


36 


212.6 


128.0 


Graham 


13 


68.4% 


4 


21.1% 


2 


10.5% 


19 


211.3 


84.0 


Haywood 


105 


66.9% 


36 


22.9% 


16 


10.2% 


157 


232.7 


166.0 


Jackson 


123 


81.5% 


21 


13.9% 


7 


4.6% 


151 


193.1 


161.0 


Macon 


53 


63.9% 


18 


21.7% 


12 


14.5% 


83 


277.8 


175.0 


Swain 


22 


57.9% 


9 


23.7% 


7 


18.4% 


38 


305.0 


188.5 


District Totals 


398 


73.4% 


95 


17.5% 


49 


9.0% 


542 


221.6 


151.5 


State Totals 


34,477 


75.3% 


6,757 


14.8% 


4,564 


10.0% 


45,798 


208.0 


109.0 



171 



CIVIL MAGISTRATE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Filings 



Dispositions 



Filings 



Dispositions 



?i strict ' 

Camden 107 

Chowan 971 

Currituck 290 

Dare 524 

Gates 291 

Pasquotank 959 

Perquimans 408 

District Totals 3,550 

District 2 

Beaufort 1,535 

Hyde 151 

Martin 835 

Tyrrell 189 

Washington 606 

District Totals 3,316 

District 3 



District 9 



Carteret 




1,509 


Craven 




2,485 


Pamlico 




226 


Pitt 




3,421 


District 


Totals 


7,641 


District 4 






Duplin 




2,063 


Jones 




188 


Onslow 




4,970 


Sampson 




1,597 


District 


Totals 


8,818 


District 5 






New Hanover 




5,460 


Pender 




762 


District 


Totals 


6,222 


District 6 






Bertie 




1,079 


Halifax 




2,020 


Hertford 




728 


Northamptor 




814 


District 


Totals 


4,641 


District 7 






Edgecombe 




6,079 


Nash 




5,920 


Wilson 




3,582 


District 


Totals 


15,581 


District 8 







Greene 347 

Lenoir 2,169 

Wayne 3,120 

District Totals 5,636 



119 

1,007 

262 

531 

301 
951 
424 

3,595 



1,472 
150 
851 
185 
594 

3,252 



1,464 

2,612 

244 

3,374 

7,694 



1,961 

174 

3,783 

1,682 

7,600 



5,248 
577 

5,825 



1,065 

1,948 

666 

755 

4,434 



6,498 
5,144 
3,393 

15,035 



377 
2,149 

3,088 

5,614 



Franklin 




1,175 


Granville 




1,306 


Person 




931 


Vance 




2,756 


Warren 




1,017 


District 


Totals 


7,185 


District 10 






Wake 




13,867 



District 11 




Harnett 


1,760 


Johnston 


2,578 


Lee 


1,215 


District Totals 


5,553 


District 12 




Cumberland 


11,558 


Hoke 


661 



District Totals 



Durham 



12,219 



District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 


1 
1 
2 


901 
352 
022 


District Totals 


5 


,275 


District 14 







16,569 



District 


15A 




Alamance 




2,903 


District 


15B 




Chatham 




903 


Orange 




1,540 



District Totals 2,443 

District 16 

Robeson 4,518 

Scotland 1,608 

District Totals 6,126 

District 17A 

Caswell 445 

Rockingham 2,753 

District Totals 3,198 

District 17B 

Stokes 438 

Surry 1,845 

District Totals 2,283 



1,090 
1,309 
863 
2,980 
1,023 

7,265 
13,481 



1,696 
2,553 
1,186 

5,435 



11,249 
594 

11,843 



1,870 
1,365 
2,020 

5,255 
16,180 

2,897 



868 
1,612 

2,480 



4,522 
1,562 

6,084 



380 
2,705 

3,085 



462 
1,981 

2,443 



I 72 



CIVIL MAGISTRATE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 



District Totals 



District Totals 



District Totals 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 



Filings 



District 


18 




Guilford 




15,860 


District 


19A 




Cabarrus 




2,363 


Rowan 




2,740 



5,103 



District 19B 




Montgomery 


1,029 


Randolph 


1,651 


District Totals 


2,680 


District 20 




Anson 


784 


Moore 


1,691 


Richmond 


1,607 


Stanly 


1,008 


Union 


2,652 



7,742 



District 21 




Forsyth 


13,486 


District 22 




Alexander 


685 


Davidson 


2,845 


Davie 


476 


Iredell 


2,757 


District Totals 


6,763 


District 23 




Alleghany 


186 


Ashe 


290 


Wilkes 


1,948 


Yadkin 


505 



2,929 



336 
136 
260 
633 
185 

1,550 



July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Dispositions 



14,490 



2,146 
2,704 

4,850 



1,098 
1,638 

2,736 



763 

1,721 

1,655 

987 

2,592 

7,718 



13,022 



714 
2,897 

471 
2,889 

6,971 



168 

268 

1,876 

524 

2,836 



338 
153 
218 
618 
170 

1,497 





Filings 


Dispositions 


District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 


2,318 
1,679 
2,969 


2,231 
1,728 
2,933 



District Totals 



District 26 



6,966 



Mecklenburg 


31 


,535 


District 27A 






Gaston 


4 


,805 


District 27B 






Cleveland 


3 


,172 


Lincoln 




998 


District Totals 


4 


,170 


District 28 






Buncombe 


4 


,462 


District 29 






Henderson 




970 


McDowell 




615 


Polk 




277 


Rutherford 


1 


,669 


Transylvania 




576 


District Totals 


4 


,107 


District 30 







Cherokee 313 

Clay 56 

Graham 69 

Haywood 904 

Jackson 361 

Macon 439 

Swain 129 

District Totals 2,271 

State Totals 247,455 



6,892 
27,989 

4,816 

3,209 
1,018 

4,227 
4,626 



1,000 
585 
305 

2,179 
538 

4,607 



319 

56 

67 

926 

328 

434 

97 

2,227 

239,001 



173 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

OFFENSES CONDITIONS 

Delinquent Undisciplined 



Other Misde- 
Capital Felony meanor Total Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused Petitions 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 

District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 

District 3 
Carteret 
Craven 
Pamlico 

Pitt 

District Totals 
District 4 









3 


3 














6 


48 


54 

















7 


7 

















27 


27 














1 


3 


4 














44 


100 


144 














3 


10 


13 





1 


1 



54 



252 






77 


123 


200 


1 


8 


9 








5 


5 





1 


1 





15 


80 


95 


3 


1 


4 


























4 


23 


27 


1 


1 


2 



96 



231 



327 



284 



360 



644 



Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 

District Totals 

District 8 

j r e e n e 
Lenoir 
Wayne 

District Totals 



190 



485 



675 









4 


4 


2 





29 


114 


143 








126 


112 


238 


4 



11 



24 



16 






78 


72 


150 


3 


7 


10 





122 


200 


322 


1 


9 


10 





19 


7 


26 














65 


81 


146 


4 


8 


12 



32 



Duplin 





25 


25 


50 


1 


1 


2 


Jones 








2 


2 





1 


1 


Onslow 





183 


187 


370 


9 


5 


14 


Sampson 





19 


46 


65 





4 


4 


District Totals 





227 


260 


487 


10 


11 


21 


District 5 
















New Hanover 





221 


286 


507 


4 


49 


53 


Pender 





43 


25 


68 





14 


14 


District Totals 





264 


311 


575 


4 


63 


67 


District 6 
















Bertie 








10 


10 











Halifax 


'J 


58 


92 


150 





9 


9 


Hertford 





12 


20 


32 





1 


1 


Northampton 





8 


5 


13 





3 


3 


District Totals 





78 


127 


205 





13 


13 


District 7 




















73 


181 


254 


1 


1 


2 





46 


123 


169 


2 





2 





71 


181 


252 





5 


5 



155 



230 



385 



20 



49 



3 
28 
24 

55 



15 

8 



23 



10 

12 

2 

32 

56 




2 
15 
5 

22 




7 
5 



12 



10 

18 
5 

33 



2 

16 

40 

58 



6 
4 
2 


5 


17 



13 
3 

20 


1 

37 



17 

17 



22 

56 



15 
2 

42 
9 

68 



25 


25 





10 

8 

11 

29 



32 
21 

14 

67 



6 
28 

67 

101 









Children 




Parental 




Before 




Rights 


Grand 


Court for 


sed 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 


4 





19 


8 








62 


26 


1 





13 


9 


2 





29 


29 


2 





6 


6 


8 


7 


169 


55 








14 


8 



17 



4 
2 

10 



16 



9 

13 

1 

6 

29 





4 

22 



26 



9 

13 
9 

31 




3 

13 

16 



1 

12 



3 

16 



4 

1 
5 

10 



6 

16 

30 



3 
9 

40 

52 



312 



243 

11 

138 


30 

422 



197 

386 

29 

221 

833 



71 

1 1 

464 



634 



598 
83 

681 



10 

178 

50 

27 

265 



315 
229 
301 

845 



18 
227 
422 

667 



141 



75 
8 

56 


24 

163 



72 
112 

14 
105 

303 



43 

9 

173 

46 

271 



216 
35 

251 



10 
77 
33 
23 

143 



124 
106 
123 

353 



14 
111 
142 

267 



174 



Capital 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

OFFENSES CONDITIONS 

Delinquent Undisciplined 

_ Parental 

Other Misde- Rights Grand 

Felony meanor Total Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused Petitions Total 



Children 

Before 

Court for 

First Time 



District 9 



Franklin 





7 


30 


37 





16 


16 


1 


8 


12 





74 


53 


Granville 





38 


65 


103 





5 


5 


5 


7 


6 





126 


57 


Person 





18 


23 


41 


5 


3 


8 


3 


5 


5 





62 


61 


Vance 





43 


83 


126 


3 


12 


15 


5 


6 


4 





156 


75 


Warren 





18 


6 


24 


1 





1 














25 


13 


District Totals 





124 


207 


331 


9 


36 


45 


14 


26 


27 





443 


259 


District 10 




























Wake 





312 


523 


835 


3 


56 


59 


17 


16 


7 


35 


969 


432 


District 11 




























Harnett 





19 


78 


97 





1 


1 


9 


12 


6 





125 


58 


Johnston 





63 


80 


143 


1 


3 


4 





18 


4 


5 


174 


91 


Lee 





24 


100 


124 











3 


10 


7 


8 


152 


78 


District Totals 





106 


258 


364 


1 


4 


5 


12 


40 


17 


13 


451 


227 


District 12 




























Cumberland 





376 


629 


1,005 





311 


311 


136 


136 


38 


16 


1,642 


539 


Hoke 





26 


47 


73 


3 


2 


5 


7 


7 


2 


5 


99 


47 


District Totals 





402 


676 


1,078 


3 


313 


316 


143 


143 


40 


21 


1,741 


586 


District 13 




























Bladen 





7 


33 


40 





6 


6 


8 


9 


4 





67 


37 


Brunswick 


1 


42 


208 


251 


2 


12 


14 


14 


16 


5 


5 


305 


76 


Columbus 





10 


65 


75 


3 


7 


10 


17 


22 


9 





133 


69 


District Totals 


1 


59 


306 


366 


5 


25 


30 


39 


47 


18 


5 


505 


182 


District 14 




























Durham 


1 


128 


178 


307 


9 


44 


53 


46 


45 


22 


15 


488 


174 


District 15A 




























Alamance 





77 


129 


206 


10 


26 


36 


22 


41 


18 


22 


345 


149 


District 15B 




























Chatham 





19 


26 


45 





3 


3 


5 


17 


6 


8 


84 


52 


Orange 





50 


75 


125 


5 


5 


10 


40 


23 


8 


6 


212 


189 


District Totals 





69 


101 


170 


5 


8 


13 


45 


40 


14 


14 


296 


241 


District 16 




























Robeson 





144 


340 


484 


6 


25 


31 


15 


70 


32 


18 


650 


237 


Scotland 





75 


98 


173 


2 





2 


3 


26 


16 


2 


222 


99 


District Totals 





219 


438 


657 


8 


25 


33 


18 


96 


48 


20 


872 


336 


District 17A 




























Caswell 





5 


15 


20 





3 


3 


1 


4 








28 


15 


Rockingham 





101 


169 


270 


2 


28 


30 


18 


22 


13 





353 


105 


District Totals 





106 


184 


290 


2 


31 


33 


19 


26 


13 





381 


120 


District 17B 





























Stokes 
Surry 

District Totals 



15 
21 

36 



13 
57 

70 



28 
78 

106 



17 
25 



9 

10 

19 



17 
27 

44 



9 

25 

34 



60 
142 



202 



41 
77 

118 



175 



Capital 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

OFFENSES CONDITIONS 

Delinquent Undisciplined 

Parental 

Other Misde- Rights Grand 

Felony meanor Total Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused Petitions Total 



Children 

Before 

Court for 

First Time 



District 18 




























Guilford 





241 


585 


826 


47 


133 


180 


36 


74 


23 


57 


1,196 


493 


District 1 9A 




























Cabarrus 


D 


30 


63 


93 


3 


21 


24 


10 


16 


9 


9 


161 


103 


Rowan 





103 


201 


304 


64 


81 


145 


101 


124 


25 


23 


722 


170 



District Totals 



133 



264 



397 



67 



102 



169 



111 



140 



34 



32 



883 



273 



District 1 9B 



Montgomery 





2 


31 


33 


3 


4 


7 


5 


14 


10 





69 


50 


Randolph 





66 


131 


197 


17 


80 


97 


56 


72 


12 


13 


447 


205 


District Totals 





68 


162 


230 


20 


84 


104 


61 


86 


22 


13 


516 


255 


District 20 





























Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 

District Totals 

District 21 
Forsyth 

District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 

District Totals 




19 

80 
10 
61 

170 



215 



23 

100 

90 

91 

118 

422 



371 



23 
119 
170 
101 

180 

593 



586 



4 
1 
1 

3 
1 

10 



31 



3 
10 
2 
9 
9 

33 



7 

11 

3 

12 

10 

43 



125 156 






5 


34 


39 


3 


13 


16 





31 


57 


88 


1 


46 


47 





5 


24 


29 


4 


11 


15 


1 


36 


174 


211 


5 


58 


63 



77 



289 



367 



13 



128 



141 




9 

25 
6 

29 

69 



13 



1 
6 

26 



4 
25 

16 
8 

68 

121 
55 



6 

30 

3 

22 

61 




6 
5 
2 
35 

48 



7 

6 

2 

13 

28 




28 
2 

3 

33 



17 



3 
16 

3 
14 

36 



34 
198 
221 
129 
325 

907 



832 



72 
205 

53 
329 

659 



24 
72 
64 
42 
120 

322 



327 



57 
156 

41 
144 

398 



District 23 




























Alleghany 





49 


51 


100 


2 


4 


6 


1 


3 


1 


2 


113 


17 


Ashe 





13 


53 


66 


14 


4 


18 





11 


4 


2 


101 


33 


Wilkes 





17 


125 


142 


43 


52 


95 


54 


134 


47 


14 


486 


121 


Yadkin 





19 


84 


103 


10 


34 


4 4 


24 


32 


5 


2 


210 


49 


District Totals 





98 


313 


41 1 


69 


94 


163 


79 


180 


57 


20 


910 


220 


District 24 




























Avery 





1 


39 


40 


5 


8 


13 


7 


4 


6 


1 


71 


39 


Madison 





6 


6 


12 


4 


5 


9 


1 


8 


12 





42 


32 


Mitchell 





i 


7 


10 





5 


5 


6 


6 


4 





31 


31 


r, a t a ■ j g a 





20 


8 


28 


3 


12 


15 


3 


5 


1 


1 


53 


42 


Yancey 





1 


16 


17 


9 


2 


11 


9 


4 


2 





43 


18 


District Totals 





31 


76 


107 


21 


32 


53 


26 


27 


25 


2 


240 


162 


District 25 




























Burke 


J 


63 


47 


110 


15 


64 


79 


13 


30 


8 


12 


252 


128 


Caldwell 





83 


107 


190 


46 


58 


104 


48 


37 


8 


17 


404 


114 


'. ■-. v . a w o a 





93 


149 


242 


20 


50 


70 


14 


24 


11 


15 


376 


149 


District Total3 





239 


303 


542 


81 


172 


253 


75 


91 


27 


44 


1,032 


391 


District 26 




























Mecklenburg 


'j 


527 


929 


1 ,456 


9 


225 


234 


12 


111 


38 


38 


1,889 


716 



1 76 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

OFFENSES CONDITIONS 

Delinquent Undisciplined 



Other Misde- 
Capital Felony meanor Total Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused 







Children 


Parental 




Before 


Rights 


Grand 


Court for 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 



District 27A 






















Gaston 





203 


447 


650 


2 


136 


138 


24 


53 


11 


District 27B 






















Cleveland 





77 


123 


200 


6 


3 


9 


17 


46 


16 


Lincoln 





18 


39 


57 


11 


4 


15 


9 


15 


7 


District Totals 





95 


162 


257 


17 


7 


24 


26 


61 


23 


District 28 






















Buncombe 


3 


87 


204 


294 


43 


190 


233 


36 


29 


12 


District 29 






















Henderson 





7 


72 


79 


26 


11 


37 


2 


14 


3 


McDowell 





43 


23 


66 


32 


18 


50 


11 


19 


1 


Polk 





3 


9 


12 


7 


1 


8 





2 


1 


Rutherford 





32 


43 


75 


13 


32 


45 


56 


52 


7 


Transylvania 





2 


9 


11 


2 


2 


4 


9 


8 


2 


District Totals 





87 


156 


243 


80 


64 


144 


78 


95 


14 


District 30 






















Cherokee - 








6 


6 


1 


3 


4 


1 


14 





Clay 





1 


3 


4 




















Graham 





1 


31 


32 


3 


7 


10 





3 





Haywood 





16 


34 


50 


4 


24 


28 


9 


8 


5 


Jackson 





3 


9 


12 


4 


5 


9 


2 


2 


2 


Macon 





2 


6 


8 


2 


2 


4 


5 


4 


4 


Swain 








1 


1 





5 


5 


4 


3 





District Totals 





23 


90 


113 


14 


46 


60 


21 


34 


11 


State Totals 


7 


5,280 


10,045 


15,332 


640 


2,336 2 


,976 


1,301 


2,172 


756 



33 



12 
1 

13 



10 



11 
9 
1 

1 1 
1 

33 



4 




3 


7 

659 



909 



300 
104 

404 



614 



146 
156 

24 
246 

35 

607 



29 
4 
45 
100 
27 
28 
13 

246 

23,196 



327 



145 

51 

196 



243 



87 
89 
20 
78 
20 

294 



25 
4 
46 
46 
24 
26 
13 

184 
9,517 



177 



CO vO 3 O t~ 



in=r oo (\i 
t— <j\ no ^o 
t*l st no 



o <M =r o 
■— no r- 



co a\ 

o iri 



3-3 SCO 

a- c— oo rvj 



o o o o c\j o o 



o o o o o 



«~ no O o 



<— o o o 



2 
- 

= 

V 

- 



o o o o o c\j o 



<\J O O o o 



o o o no 



o ^o o 



O o O o 



- 
- 
< 



f\i o *"* o o un o 



(\j o o f\j fM q- o 



o o ^ O •" 



LT* O P— o o 



o o 6*- o 



=T 0\ =T O 



=r r- m 



(\l .- C\J t- 



Sot 

u ° 
w 04 i 



=r o ^" o o eg o 



CM c\j *~ o o m o 



c\j *— o o O c\j o 



on o r— o (*1 



on r- =r o CM 



m *- o o o 



^ (\i o in 



O zT O vO 



C— =t ■— VO 



=t o t~ o r 1 






=r lo on o C og o 



c^ o ^o o o 



o m co lo 



•«0 ^- on o 



— — ■* "~ 



52 

o 
- 
< 

— 

- 

— . 

- 



O o ° o o o o 



O o O o O o o 



o m^o o fM oi 



«- *- r- o «- =r 



CO o CM O «~ ■— 



O o CM O 



LTl o rn O C-- 



*o o o no 



=r o o in 
m o ,— no 



OJ t- rT o> 



o ry mo 



no t- 



o t- 



no — a- t-_ CM no 



no r— r- no 
o^ o c\j a- 



in =r t- o 



vO i— OO CO 

O CM 



■a 3 ■- i) oj cr •y 
o i- i- J-> to t- 



o u '_> a 



o 

,-( 00 
C i-< c 

3 oj j l r 

n) ^ L L n 

a> >, co >, co 

co -x. T. (-i 3 



i. ro h 
o o a- a- 



C 3 O 

•H to O to 

•-{ tU .-H Q. 

Q. C W E 

3 O C to 

Cl -o O CO 



cu ro o co 



4-> -H 4-> 4J 



CD CO 

CO -x. 



178 



cm a- \o 


CM 


o <y\ fr» 


5 vO 0\ 


o 


<- o 


moo rvj 


o\ 


cm =r 



ioms 


cm 


o-> ro 


evi 


>£> ^o cm 


^o i— =r 


no 


CT\ in 


LO 


som 


m «— cm 


t- 


t~ 


GO 


m in 



O O 3" 



O O O 



O <- 



E 

u 



=r a- t- 



O o O r- O r- 



C\) OO o 



o =r o 



GO 

W 
H 

H 
«2 

w 

>1 

u ° 
jag "> 

OH g 
OH ' 

o 

H 
<3 
U 

- 






r- I- CM 



o no o ro 



o ro c*- o *■ *~ 



o o lo c\j o 



-- in o o ^ 



cr\ u~i c~- *- 



o =r ^ o c^ 



m ■- o en ■- 



(\l ^ co .— 



<- OO CM i- 

i— i— m 

CM CM 



Q 



o o =r 
a- a- a- 



o m cr> 
=r oo 



3" CM CM o ^ 

cm =r in 



CM O WD 

CM i- «- 



in o 
o oo 



OO 
CM 



m on oo o 3" 

mt^ ^ in en 



i-»- CM 














H 






jj 


CD 




CI 


n 




•rl 


e 




l_ 


o 


c 


4-> 


o 





(0 


a; x: 


CO 


■rH 


qo n 


rH 


Q 



o c 
c >. 

ro 



^ 


> 


O 


0) 


CD 


c 


c 


10 





i_ 


CO 


m 


t. 


a 


S- 


L 


i_ 


CD 


ra 


ro 


lb 


O 


0_ 


> 


3 



o 




i— 


*~ 




*- 


j-> 




■U 


o 




o 


■H 




■H 


t- 




S- 


4-> 


CD 


Jj 


V) 


^ 


10 


■r-t 


ro 


•H 


o 


3 


Q 



H 0) O <U 





a 


m 




•H 


3 


c 


■* 


ii 


CD 


10 


(-■ 


T3 


c 


3 


ro 


■3 






c. 





DO 


m 


o 



179 



•- i- rvj 



pri oo 

LO OO 



i- uD 
C\J on 



<- .- CM 



CO LA m 



o o 



o o 



o o 



t- t~- 






<- o .- 



< 
- 



w 



z£ 



n Cm «J 

- y ^ i 

oh' = 

<; m »h p. 

mm *T* >% Q 



o .- <- 



c 
- 

— 

- 

— : 
- 
< 



<- T- (M 



cr\ c\j 
r\J cm 
zr •— 



c\j 



^) in *- 



180 



ON 00 t— 3" *0 
in ON in CO o 



cp. in in co 

in o-\ yo zr 



in on in in oo 
t- cm on =r i- 
«- i- in cm o 



m(Mi\j m^ 
cm in cm on cm 



vo o in <— 



o o cm o cm 



O oo no o oo 
cm 



O O no 



o oo cm a- 



cm in in o c\i 



o o on cm 



o o on o o 



■— o o o o «— 



\0 \0 t\J 



on o in 



in 



H 

w 



O O <M O CTx i— 



r- m o c\j ro 









U ° 

OH S 






. . 3 

Cfl tf I 

OH ' 
< a *■? 

o 

H 
<! 

U 

Q 
Q 



o .- 3- <- 



i zr oj o o 



0*^0^" 



oj ro lt\ o 



«- zr O LTi 



o m in c— 



o (\| f-3- m 



a- m =r cr\ 


CM 


oo m in ^d 


=T 


on o^ o r\j cm 


^o 


oo .— =r 


CM CM 


*£> 


«- a- oo 


o 

CM 


cm on i- 


t-- 


O CTv ■— 
CM 



r- >- O o 



*0(D O (\nO 



zr oo in oo en 



on 

CM 



vOio a- ^ m 



=* oo ^ \o 



o oo o\ . 



C"- vO O oo 



CM on *- on 

CM OO CM c- 



t- r- m .— 



CM 



CM .- -=T o 
CM 



o cm on oo 

«— i— O CM 



CM \£> «— t— 



C^^O C^ CO 

vd rr in o^ 



on 



CM m =T =T 



oo ao o oo in 



vo rvj oo nj cm 



oo zr cm \o =r 
in i— i- 



*— co cm o^ oo 



*- in 
in .— 



=r <- cm 
in cm 



o oo 



o^ oo o^ 
crv oo in 



oo OO i- 
mm in 



=rcoo 

'~l >— vO 



CM 



>— OO 



C <U E i-l C 

O S> £ C O 

« O O (D -H 

C O -H 4-) C 

< seems 



T3 O .-H 

C W ^H 

ro -o cu ai 

X -r-l -H *0 

11 > > 

■HO >H H (0 (0 L 

Q <C Q Q l-H 



>> 




c 




ro 




.c n 


C 4 


00 01 


■H 


o oj i; 


Zi 


rH £ r-H 


TJ £ 



Q < <C 3 >h 



>> <n s: 3 en 

I_ -H O CO O 

CD X> 4-> 4-> C 

i-i > ca -h ro ro 

a «s s s 3 >h 



•h 3 ro ro 

Qinuu 



181 



IF 



<\l CM 

«- O 



«- «- <\j 



O o o o o o o 



LO o O O O 



=r o o o o vo o 



y: 



*■ o o o cvi 



o o O o *"" «— O 



*"" «- O lO O 



o o O <o <"" ro o 



-^ J ^ 

LJ ° 

^ CO 



fa W a « 



v: 2i i 


- 


V) 








w H 


~~ 


Q 


RIN 
DIS 

1986 


-■-. 

CJ 

B 

— 
C 


— 
c 



r- O O CV] «" 



CT* OJ O r- LO 



OJ r- O OJ St 



o o rnf-o <- o *— 



=? o o co lo m no 



O o O i- o »- o 



<- o O =r LO LO OJ 



04 - 



3 

— ! 
- 
< 



LO *— O O O 



cr» m o *— o 



O CO LO LO vO 

oo m ^o 



OJ o OJ o =3" OJ o 



OJ O °0 CO ^D <— =3" 



OJ o °J t— =f o o 



F 


.^ 


u 


<u 




l_ 


(> 


1- 


<D 


I 




<I) 


O 


4-> 


T3 


o 


:»: 


c 


C 


in 


C 


o 




Jj 


3 




<U 


o 


o 


3 


co 


i . 


X 


2: 


Du 


OX 



03 O KJ C C 



t. 


>. 


e 


s 


i! 


O 


•H 


<u 


ID 


OJ 


>> 


C) 


o 


HI 


.c 


rH 


s- 


ra 


10 


(I) 


■5 


u 


U 


o 


at 


'-j 


21 


CO 



182 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS OF INFRACTIONS AND 
CRIMINAL CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1977 _ 1986-87 



M 
I 

L 
L 

I 
() 

N 
S 



o 

F 



C 

A 
S 
E 

S 



1.6 



1.4 



1.2 



0.8 



0.6 



0.4 



0.2 



All Cases 



Filings 




Motor Vehicle ^ 

and Infractions yS 



Dispositions 
Filings 




Dispositions 



Non-Motor Vehicle 



77 



78 78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 



Infractions are a new case category in district court. Effec- 
tive September 1, 1986, many minor traffic offenses 
became "infractions" rather than criminal offenses. In- 
fractions are non-criminal violations of law not punish- 
able by imprisonment. However, to allow meaningful 
comparison of multi-year trends in the district courts, 
infractions are included with criminal motor vehicle cases 
in this chart. Almost all infractions were criminal motor 



vehicle cases in prior years. (The major exception is pos- 
session of beer or wine by persons over 1 8 and under 2 1 , 
which was neither a crime nor an infraction last year.) 
Motor vehicle plus infraction filings together in 1986-87 
were 16.2% greater than motor vehicle filings the year 
before, after an 8.7% increase in motor vehicle filings 
from 1984-85 to 1985-86. Non-motor vehicle filings 
increased 5.0% from 1985-86 to 1986-87. 



183 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Dispositions 



Total 
Filed 



Waiver 



Other 



Total Dispositions 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 

District 2 



Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 

District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 

District Totals 

District 4 



Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 

District Totals 

District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 

District Totals 

District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 

District Totals 

District 7 



Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 



District Totals 

District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 

District Totals 



403 

617 
1,191 
4,073 

730 
1,073 

570 

8,657 



3,772 
492 

2,064 
394 
785 

7,507 



4,405 

6,794 

714 

10,000 

21,913 



2,000 

583 

8,076 

4,100 

14,759 



11,003 
2,008 

13,011 



1,414 
4,323 
1,730 
1,806 

9,273 



4,151 
8,218 
3,668 

16,037 



1,049 
4,032 
5,526 

10,607 



263 
401 
853 
2,834 
289 
556 
380 

5,576 



1,386 
171 

1,155 
205 
425 

3,342 



2,169 

2,693 

334 

3,682 

8,878 



1,296 

284 

2,409 

1,831 

5,820 



4,000 
557 

4,557 



773 

2,383 

718 

813 

4,687 



2,184 
4,222 
1,698 

8,104 



501 
1,521 
2,147 

4,169 



262 
267 
855 
1,589 
526 
660 
279 

4,438 



2,319 
325 

1,735 
215 
382 

4,976 



2,906 

4,991 

325 

7,282 

15,504 



1,808 

346 

5,917 

2,564 

10,635 



7,783 
1,560 

9,343 



1,043 
3,186 
1,152 
1,512 

6,893 



2,016 
3,792 
2,227 

8,035 



657 
3,120 
3,002 

6,779 



525 

668 
1,708 
4,423 

815 
1,216 

659 

10,014 



3,705 
496 

2,890 
420 
807 

8,318 



5,075 

7,684 

659 

10,964 

24,382 



3,104 

630 

8,326 

4,395 

16,455 



11,783 
2,117 

13,900 



1,816 
5,569 
1,870 
2,325 

11,580 



4,200 
8,014 
3,925 

16,139 



1,158 
4,641 
5,149 

10,948 



^Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. As a result, there has been a substantial 
decrease in criminal motor vehicle filings and dispositions during this fiscal year. 



184 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Dispositions 





Total 




Filed 


District 9 




Franklin 


2,196 


Granville 


1,935 


Person 


1,819 


Vance 


2,681 


Warren 


1,127 


District Totals 


9,758 


District 10 




Wake 


38,588 


District 11 




Harnett 


4,254 


Johnston 


7,544 


Lee 


2,699 



District Totals 

District 12 

Cumberland 

Hoke 

District Totals 

District 13 
Bladen 
Brunswick 
Columbus 

District Totals 

District 14 



Robeson 
Scotland 



District Totals 



14,497 



20,166 
2,463 

22,629 



3,783 
2,795 
4,061 

10,639 



Durham 


19 


,062 


District 1 5A 






Alamance 


6 


860 


District 15B 






Chatham 


4 


112 


Orange 


4 


493 


District Totals 


8 


605 


District 16 







9,005 
2,427 

11,432 



District 17A 




Caswell 


1,509 


Rockingham 


5,500 


District Totals 


7,009 


District 17B 




Stokes 


1,469 


Surry 


3,978 



District Totals 



5,447 



Waiver 

668 
918 
633 
1,075 
389 

3,683 
11,489 



1,352 

2,598 

965 

4,915 



7,993 
1,007 

9,000 



1,548 

849 

1,455 

3,852 
8,617 

2,739 



1,548 
1,500 

3,048 



2,937 
1,103 

4,040 



502 
2,450 

2,952 



630 
1,910 

2,540 



Other 



1,631 
1,299 
1,353 
1,892 
693 



6,i 



27,693 



3,036 
4,602 
1,726 

9,364 



15,032 
1,516 

16,548 



2,811 
1,986 
2,892 

7,689 
11,283 

4,769 



3,029 
3,438 

6,467 



8,128 
1,372 

9,500 



828 
3,617 

4,445 



940 
2,495 

3,435 



Total Dispositions 



2,299 
2,217 
1,986 
2,967 
1,082 

10,551 



39,182 



4,388 
7,200 
2,691 

14,279 



23,025 
2,523 

25,548 



4,359 
2,835 
4,347 

11,541 



19,900 



7,508 



4,577 
4,938 

9,515 



11,065 
2,475 

13,540 



1,330 
6,067 

7,397 



1,570 
4,405 

5,975 



"Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. As a result, there has been a substantial 
decrease in criminal motor vehicle filings and dispositions during this fiscal year. 



185 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Dispositions 



Total 
Filed 



Waiver 



Other 



Total Dispositions 



District 18 
Guilford 



29,904 



10,771 



24,674 



35,445 



District 1 9A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 



7,254 
6,715 



3,110 
3,041 



4,407 
4,473 



7,517 
7,514 



District Totals 



13,969 



6,151 



15,031 



District 19B 




Montgomery 


2,001 


Randolph 


5,778 


District Totals 


7,779 


District 20 




Anson 


2,515 


Moore 


3,887 


Richmond 


2,876 


Stanly 


2,186 


Union 


4,415 


District Totals 


15,879 


District 21 




Forsyth 


17,568 


District 22 




Alexander 


1,413 


Davidson 


9,358 


Davie 


2,052 


Iredell 


7,445 



District Totals 



20,268 



908 
2,542 

3,450 



797 
1,564 
1,344 
1,088 
1,891 

6,684 



5,366 



583 
3,814 

976 
3,343 

8,716 



1,542 
3.585 

5,127 



1,650 
2,815 
1,849 
1,428 
2,853 

10,595 



12,594 



1,083 
5,728 
1,763 
3,344 

11,918 



2,450 
6,127 

8,577 



2,447 
4,379 
3,193 
2,516 
4,744 

17,279 



17,960 



1,666 
9,542 
2,739 
6,687 

20,634 



District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 



525 

859 

3,124 

1,719 



221 

440 

1,471 

863 



484 

523 

2,429 

1,065 



705 

963 

3,900 

1,928 



District Totals 



6,227 



2,995 



4,501 



7,496 



District 24 
Avery 
Madison 
Mitchell 

Watauga 
Yancey 



898 
1,140 

754 
2,554 

742 



400 
732 
327 
1,458 
459 



647 
593 
436 
1,313 
408 



1,047 
1,325 

763 
2,771 

867 



District Totals 



6,088 



3,376 



3,397 



6,773 



District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 



5,316 
4,447 
8,384 



2,224 
1,643 
3,303 



3,303 
3,165 
5,094 



5,527 

4,808 
8,397 



District Totals 



18,147 



7,170 



11,562 



18,732 



District 26 
Mecklenburg 



43,421 



18,363 



28,357 



46,720 



^Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. As a result, there has been a substantial 
decrease in criminal motor vehicle filings and dispositions during this fiscal year. 



186 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Dispositions 



Total 
Filed 



Waiver 



Other 



Total Dispositions 



District 27A 
Gaston 



12,966 



4,725 



8,842 



13,567 



District 27B 



Cleveland 


6,245 


Lincoln 


3,221 


District Totals 


9,466 


District 28 




Buncombe 


10,129 


District 29 




Henderson 


3,534 


McDowell 


2,076 


Polk 


1,256 


Rutherford 


2,978 


Transylvania 


1,277 


District Totals 


11,121 


District 30 




Cherokee 


1,767 


Clay 


407 


Graham 


347 


Haywood 


3,077 


Jackson 


1,264 


Macon 


1,390 


Swain 


1,020 



2,741 
1,062 

3,803 
4,953 



2,023 
1,334 

566 
1,214 

609 

5,746 



District Totals 


9,272 


State Totals 


488,494 



1 


,014 




233 




137 


1 


,907 




594 




729 




523 


5 


,137 


199 


,414 



3,619 
2,233 

5,852 

5,862 



1,946 
1,230 

643 
1,543 

745 

6,107 



994 
179 
209 

1,414 
783 
818 
601 

4,998 

327,930 



6,360 
3,295 

9,655 
10,815 



3,969 
2,564 
1,209 
2,757 
1,354 

11,853 



2,008 
412 
346 
3,321 
1,377 
1,547 
1,124 

10,135 
527,344 



^Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. As a result, there has been a substantial 
decrease in criminal motor vehicle filings and dispositions during this fiscal year. 



187 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 





July 1, 1986 


— June 30 


, 1987 










Begin 
















End 


'ending 






Total 






% 


Caseload 


Pending 


7/1/86 




Filed 


Caseload 




Disposed 


D 


isposed 


6/30/87 


25 




163 


188 




168 




89.4% 


20 


35 




590 


625 




583 




93.3% 


42 


05 




362 


427 




388 




90.9% 


39 


358 




2,523 


2,881 




2,410 




83.7% 


471 


8 




312 


320 




293 




91.6% 


27 


151 




2,163 


2,317 




2,132 




92.0% 


185 


39 




464 


503 




461 




91.7% 


42 



District Totals 



684 



6,577 



7,261 



6,435 



1.6% 



826 



District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 



227 


3,063 


3,290 


2,975 


90.4% 


315 


10 


554 


564 


497 


88.1% 


67 


107 


1,308 


1,415 


1,301 


91.9% 


114 


7 


192 


199 


175 


87.9% 


24 


37 


712 


749 


713 


95.2% 


36 



District Totals 



388 



5,829 



6,217 



5,661 



91.1% 



556 



District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 



District Totals 

District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 



836 


4,771 


5,607 


4,627 


82.5% 


980 


941 


6,121 


7,062 


6,137 


86.9% 


925 


62 


714 


776 


698 


89.9% 


78 


1,458 


12,062 


13,520 


12,222 


90.4% 


1,298 


3,297 


23,668 


26,965 


23,684 


87.8% 


3,281 


201 


2,522 


2,723 


2,480 


91.1% 


243 


51 


588 


639 


604 


94.5% 


35 


1,149 


11,489 


12,638 


11,427 


90.4% 


1,211 


285 


3,134 


3,419 


3,003 


87.8% 


416 



District Totals 



1,686 



17,733 



19,419 



17,514 



90.2% 



1,905 



District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 



2,051 


13,176 


15,527 


13,261 


85.4% 


2,266 


254 


1,538 


1,792 


1,512 


84.4% 


280 



District Totals 



2,305 



15,014 



17,319 



14,773 



85.3% 



2,546 



District 6 



Bertie 




65 


1,230 


1,295 


1,212 


93.6% 


83 


Halifax 




578 


4,428 


5,006 


4,327 


86.4% 


679 


Hertford 




181 


1,782 


1,963 


1,858 


94.7% 


105 


Northamptor 




86 


953 


1,039 


961 


92.5% 


78 


District 


Totals 


910 


8,393 


9,303 


8,358 


89.8% 


945 


District 7 
















Edgecombe 




853 


6,071 


6,924 


5,733 


82.8% 


1,191 


Nash 




979 


7,584 


8,563 


7,333 


85.6% 


1,230 


Wilson 




989 


5,615 


6,604 


5,273 


79.8% 


1,331 


District 


Totals 


2,821 


19,270 


22,091 


18,339 


83.0% 


3,752 


District 8 

















Greene 
Lenoir 

Wayne 



103 

694 
919 



820 
4,644 

6,419 



923 
5,338 
7,338 



690 
4,490 
6,266 



74.8% 
84.1% 
85.4% 



233 
848 
1,072 



District Totals 



1,716 



11, J 



13,599 



11.446 



84.2% 



2,153 



188 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 





Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/86 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


District 9 














Franklin 


123 


1,955 


2,078 


1,879 


90.4% 


199 


Granville 


232 


2,119 


2,351 


2,126 


90.4% 


225 


Person 


204 


1,762 


1,966 


1,727 


87.8% 


239 


Vance 


477 


3,547 


4,024 


3,743 


93.0% 


281 


Warren 


84 


1,000 


1,084 


969 


89.4% 


115 


District Totals 


1,120 


10,383 


11,503 


10,444 


90.8% 


1,059 


District 10 














Wake 


5,803 


31,952 


37,755 


30,132 


79.8% 


7,623 


District 11 














Harnett 


440 


4,124 


4,564 


4,003 


87.7% 


561 


Johnston 


635 


5,333 


5,968 


5,227 


87.6% 


741 


Lee 


363 


3,990 


4,353 


3,937 


90.4% 


416 


District Totals 


1,438 


13,447 


14,885 


13,167 


88.5% 


1,718 


District 12 














Cumberland 


4,637 


20,031 


24,668 


20,120 


81.6% 


4,548 


Hoke 


295 


1,795 


2,090 


1,791 


85.7% 


299 


District Totals 


4,932 


21,826 


26,758 


21,911 


81.9% 


4,847 


District 13 














Bladen 


270 


2,236 


2,506 


2,160 


86.2% 


346 


Brunswick 


444 


2,964 


3,408 


2,916 


85.6% 


492 


Columbus 


402 


3,381 


3,783 


3,314 


87.6% 


469 


District Totals 


1,116 


8,581 


9,697 


8,390 


86.5% 


1,307 


District 14 














Durham 


3,872 


16,094 


19,966 


15,450 


77.4% 


4,516 


District 15A 














Alamance 


736 


6,697 


7,433 


6,515 


87.6% 


918 


District 15B 














Chatham 


291 


1,838 


2,129 


1,888 


88.7% 


241 


Orange 


630 


4,291 


4,921 


4,191 


85.2% 


730 


District Totals 


921 


6,129 


7,050 


6,079 


86.2% 


971 


District 16 














Robeson 


848 


10,855 


11,703 


10,608 


90.6% 


1,095 


Scotland 


327 


4,032 


4,359 


4,039 


92.7% 


320 


District Totals 


1,175 


14,887 


16,062 


14,647 


91.2% 


1,415 


District 17A 














Caswell 


61 


934 


995 


889 


89.3% 


106 


Rockingham 


550 


4,951 


5,501 


4,884 


88.8% 


617 


District Totals 


611 


5,885 


6,496 


5,773 


88.9% 


723 


District 17B 














Stokes 


112 


1,258 


1,370 


1,178 


86.0% 


192 


Surry 


477 


3,719 


4,196 


3,710 


88.4% 


486 



District Totals 



589 



4,977 



5,566 



4,! 



87.8% 



678 



189 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



District 18 
Guilford 



Begin 
Pending 

7/1/86 



9,117 



Filed 



31,548 



Total 
Caseload 



40,665 



Disposed 

29,840 



% Caseload 
Disposed 

73.4% 



End 
Pending 

6/30/87 



10,825 



District 1 9A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 

District Totals 



615 
573 



1.1* 



5,297 
5,154 

10,451 



5,912 
5,727 

11,639 



5,280 
5,156 

10,436 



89.3% 
90.0% 

89.7% 



632 
571 

1,203 



District 19B 

Montgomery 
Randolph 

District Totals 

District 20 



Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 

District Totals 

District 21 
Forsyth 

District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 

District Totals 

District 23 



Burke 
Caldwell 

Catawba 

District Totals 

District 26 

''. h '. /. 1 <-. r, o j r g 



405 

817 

1,222 



1 ,701 



2,614 



2,289 



2,122 



9,154 



2,162 
5,598 

7,760 



16,411 



19,350 



16,533 



2,567 
6,415 

8,982 



18,112 



21,964 



18,822 



15,523 



40,274 



17,645 



49,428 



2,213 
5,337 

7,550 



16,171 



18,114 



16,213 



15,233 



39,780 



86.2% 
83.2% 

84.1% 



89.3% 



82.5% 



86.1% 



86.3% 



).5% 



354 
1,078 

1,432 



199 


1,780 


1,979 


1,785 


90.2% 


194 


568 


4,151 


4,719 


4,209 


89.2% 


510 


226 


3,231 


3,457 


3,171 


91.7% 


286 


206 


2,410 


2,616 


2,364 


90.4% 


252 


502 


4,839 


5,341 


4,642 


86.9% 


699 



1,941 



3,850 



172 


1,263 


1,435 


1,261 


87.9% 


174 


1,085 


7,664 


8,749 


7,457 


85.2% 


1,292 


119 


1,046 


1,165 


967 


83.0% 


198 


913 


6,560 


7,473 


6,528 


87.4% 


945 



2,609 



Alleghany 




39 


360 


399 


370 


92.7% 


29 


Ashe 




68 


722 


790 


724 


91.6% 


66 


Wilkes 




393 


3,757 


4,150 


3,625 


87.3% 


525 


Yadkin 




54 


857 


911 


832 


91.3% 


79 


District 


Totals 


554 


5,696 


6,250 


5,551 


88.8% 


699 


District 24 
















Avery 




173 


651 


824 


635 


77.1% 


189 


Madison 




137 


538 


675 


531 


78.7% 


144 


Mitchell 




91 


484 


575 


477 


83.0% 


98 


Watauga 




190 


1,338 


1,528 


1,250 


81.8% 


278 


Yancey 




59 


307 


366 


328 


89.6% 


38 


District 


Totals 


650 


3,318 


3,968 


3,221 


81.2% 


747 


District 25 

















584 


4,215 


4,799 


4,334 


90.3% 


465 


552 


4,169 


4,721 


3,942 


83.5% 


779 


986 


7,139 


8,125 


6,957 


85.6% 


1,168 



2,412 



9,648 



190 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 









July 1, 1986 


— June 30, 


1987 








B< 


gin 










End 




Per 


ding 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/86 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/87 


District 27A 
















Gaston 


3 


,099 


14,614 


17,713 


14,417 


81.4% 


3,296 


District 27B 
















Cleveland 




584 


4,610 


5,194 


4,665 


89.8% 


529 


Lincoln 




406 


3,294 


3,700 


3,370 


91.1% 


330 


District Totals 




990 


7,904 


8,894 


8,035 


90.3% 


859 


District 28 
















Buncombe 


1 


,574 


12,827 


14,401 


12,718 


88.3% 


1,683 


District 29 
















Henderson 




585 


3,129 


3,714 


3,150 


84.8% 


564 


McDowell 




201 


1,577 


1,778 


1,477 


83.1% 


301 


Polk 




84 


574 


658 


554 


84.2% 


104 


Rutherford 




816 


3,553 


4,369 


3,241 


74.2% 


1,128 


Transylvania 




305 


1,525 


1,830 


1,545 


84.4% 


285 


District Totals 


1 


,991 


10,358 


12,349 


9,967 


80.7% 


2,382 


District 30 
















Cherokee 




464 


1,246 


1,710 


879 


51.4% 


831 


Clay 




35 


258 


293 


258 


88.1% 


35 


Graham 




34 


358 


392 


359 


91.6% 


33 


Haywood 




263 


2,354 


2,617 


2,240 


85.6% 


377 


Jackson 




72 


345 


917 


834 


90.9% 


83 


Macon 




129 


670 


799 


676 


84.6% 


123 


Swain 




46 


608 


654 


601 


91.9% 


53 


District Totals 


1 


,043 


6,339 


7,382 


5,847 


79.2% 


1,535 


State Totals 


75 


,428 


468,131 


543,559 


456,699 


84.0% 


86,860 



191 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF DISTRICT COURT 
CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 
MISDEMEANORS 



Waivers 
(54,194) 



Guiltv Plea 
(160',024) 




Other 

(32,216) 



Dismissals 
(124,879) 



Not Guilty Plea (Trial) 
42,709 



FELONY PROBABLE CAUSE MATTERS 



Probable Cause Not Found 
(2,729) 



Probable Cause Hearing 
Waived 
(17,497) 




Heard and Bound Over 
(7,882) 



Guilty pleas predominate in the disposition of criminal 
non-motor vehicle cases in the district courts. The waivers 
referred to in the upper chart are waivers of trial in 
worthless check cases where the defendant pleads guilty 
before a magistrate. The "Other" category includes 
changes of venue, waivers of extradition, findings of no 
probable cause at initial appearance, and dismissals by 



Superceding 

Indictment 

(14,569) 



the court. The number of district court felony cases super- 
ceded by indictment increased from 10,939 last year to 
1 4,569 this year, or from 28. 1 % of all district court felony 
dispositions to 34. 1 %. A felony charge in district court is 
superceded when the grand jury returns a true bill of 
indictment to the superior court before a probable cause 
hearing is held. 



192 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



















Felony 








Worthless 


Guilty 


Plea 


Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 








Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 
DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 1 




















Camden 







54 


26 


18 


16 


42 


12 


168 


Chowan 




8 


312 


34 


84 


97 


4 


44 


583 


Currituck 




11 


115 


37 


76 


84 


35 


30 


388 


Dare 




143 


1,180 


123 


192 


459 


104 


209 


2,410 


Gates 




20 


105 





40 


40 


48 


40 


293 


Pasquotank 




117 


709 


45 


523 


368 


150 


220 


2,132 


Perquimans 




3 


187 


29 


90 


113 


5 


34 


461 


District 


Totals 


302 


2,662 


294 


1,023 


1,177 


388 


589 


6,435 


% of Total 


4.7% 


41.4% 


4.6% 


15.9% 


18.3% 


6.0% 


9.2% 


100.0% 


District 2 




















Beaufort 




165 


944 


676 


437 


312 


136 


305 


2,975 


Hyde 




2 


127 


161 


89 


44 


34 


40 


497 


Martin 




244 


455 


22 


191 


148 


89 


152 


1,301 


Tyrrell 




4 


50 


31 


29 


17 


15 


29 


175 


Washington 




148 


168 


68 


143 


58 


45 


83 


713 


District 


Totals 


563 


1,744 


958 


889 


579 


319 


609 


5,661 


% of Total 


9.9% 


30.8% 


16.9% 


15.7% 


10.2% 


5.6% 


10.8% 


100.0% 


District 3 




















Carteret 




558 


1,383 


551 


140 


1,696 


151 


148 


4,627 


Craven 




1,034 


2,100 


354 


408 


1,495 


326 


420 


6,137 


Pamlico 




38 


218 


131 


80 


157 


10 


64 


698 


Pitt 




3,139 


3,779 


335 


677 


2,801 


476 


1,015 


12,222 


District 


Totals 


4,769 


7,480 


1,371 


1,305 


6,149 


963 


1,647 


23,684 


% of Total 


20.1% 


31.6% 


5.8% 


5.5% 


26.0% 


4.1% 


7.0% 


100.0% 


District 4 




















Duplin 




508 


500 


21 


398 


484 


81 


488 


2,480 


Jones 




28 


125 


1 


116 


112 


139 


83 


604 


Onslow 




2,504 


4,525 


240 


484 


1,474 


830 


1,370 


11,427 


Sampson 




698 


1,109 


14 


76 


652 


105 


349 


3,003 


District 


Totals 


3.738 


6,259 


276 


1,074 


2,722 


1,155 


2,290 


17,514 


% of TotJ 


il 


21.3% 


35.7% 


1.6% 


6.1% 


15.5% 


6.6% 


13.1% 


100.0% 


District 5 




















New Hanover 




1,067 


5,143 


489 


1,176 


2,853 


661 


1,872 


13,261 


Pender 




27 


701 


34 


132 


367 


35 


216 


1,512 


District 


Totals 


1,094 


5,844 


523 


1,308 


3,220 


696 


2,088 


14,773 


% of Tote 


il 


7.4% 


39.6% 


3.5% 


8.9% 


21.8% 


4.7% 


14.1% 


100.0%. 


District 6 




















Bertie 




54 


464 


29 


131 


179 


278 


77 


1,212 


Halifax 




309 


1,745 


275 


531 


983 


262 


222 


4,327 


Hertford 




180 


864 


3 


92 


256 


290 


173 


1,858 


Northamptor 


i 


91 


336 


34 


169 


107 


140 


84 


961 


District 


Totals 


634 


3,409 


341 


923 


1,525 


970 


556 


8,358 


% of Tots 


il 


7.6% 


40.8% 


4.1% 


11.0% 


18.2% 


11.6% 


6.7% 


100.0% 


District 7 




















Edgecombe 




976 


1,279 


140 


1,352 


1,365 


333 


288 


5,733 


Nash 




1,770 


2,279 


335 


632 


1,477 


382 


458 


7,333 


Wilson 




860 


1,961 


191 


468 


1,158 


240 


395 


5,273 


District 


Totals 


3,606 


5,519 


666 


2,452 


4,000 


955 


1 ,141 


18,339 


% of Total 


19.7% 


30.1% 


3.6% 


13.4% 


21.8% 


5.2% 


6.2% 


100.0% 



193 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

















Felony 






Worthless 
Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 


Plea 


Not 

Guilty 

Plea 


Dismissed 
by 
DA 


Other 


Probable 
Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 8 


















Greene 


66 


160 


45 


67 


200 


103 


49 


690 


Lenoir 


318 


1,295 


223 


450 


1,546 


365 


293 


4,490 


Wayne 


1,043 


1,619 


71 


345 


2,326 


465 


397 


6,266 


District Totals 


1,427 


3,074 


339 


862 


4,072 


933 


739 


11,446 


i of Total 


12.5% 


26.9% 


3.0% 


7.5% 


35.6% 


8.2% 


6.5% 


100.0% 


District 9 


















Franklin 


329 


624 


113 


222 


267 


150 


174 


1,879 


Granville 


302 


772 


17 


255 


316 


258 


206 


2,126 


Person 


20 1 


489 


195 


241 


266 


139 


196 


1,727 


Vance 


433 


1,184 


218 


498 


770 


400 


240 


3,743 


Warren 


72 


236 


28 


219 


199 


142 


73 


969 


District Totals 


1,337 


3,305 


571 


1,435 


1,818 


1,089 


889 


10,444 


% of Total 


12.8% 


31.6% 


5.5% 


13.7% 


17.4% 


10.4% 


8.5% 


100.0% 


District 10 


















Wake 


6,064 


8,139 


1,316 


1,617 


8,784 


1,108 


3,104 


30,132 


% of Total 


20.1% 


27.0% 


4.4% 


5.4% 


29.2% 


3.7% 


10.3% 


100.0% 


District 11 


















Harnett 


870 


852 


54 


782 


682 


445 


318 


4,003 


Johnston 


1 ,066 


1,790 


146 


463 


921 


581 


260 


5,227 


Lee 


909 


1,290 


12 


453 


700 


298 


275 


3,937 


District Totals 


2,845 


3,932 


212 


1,698 


2,303 


1,324 


853 


13,167 


% of Total 


21.6% 


29.9% 


1.6% 


12.9% 


17.5% 


10.1% 


6.5% 


100.0% 


District 12 


















Cumberland 


4,862 


6,052 


143 


1,499 


5,735 


513 


1,316 


20,120 


Hoke 


285 


12 


1 


949 


315 


118 


111 


1,791 


District Totals 


5,147 


6,064 


144 


2,448 


6,050 


631 


1,427 


21,911 


% of Total 


23.5% 


27.7% 


0.7% 


11 .2% 


27.6% 


2.9% 


6.5% 


100.0% 


District 13 


















Bladen 


239 


520 


54 


505 


644 


136 


62 


2,160 


Brunswick 


131 


1,049 


339 


332 


848 


40 


174 


2,916 


Columbus 


625 


1,076 


9 


363 


808 


270 


163 


3,314 


District Totals 


998 


2,645 


402 


1,200 


2,300 


446 


399 


8,390 


% of Total 


11.9% 


31.5% 


4.8% 


14.3% 


27.4% 


5.3% 


4.8% 


100.0% 


District 14 


















Durham 


1,285 


5,741 


7 


1,010 


4,660 


1,321 


1,426 


15,450 


% of Total 


8.3% 


37.2% 


.0% 


6.5% 


30.2% 


8.6% 


9.2% 


100.0% 


District 15A 


















Alamance 


416 


2,827 


253 


678 


1,119 


441 


781 


6,515 


% of Total 


6.4% 


43.4% 


3.9% 


10.4% 


17.2% 


6.8% 


12.0% 


100.0% 


District 15B 


















Chatham 


193 


433 


544 


93 


428 


52 


145 


1,888 


Orange 


60 3 


1,053 


154 


199 


1,499 


234 


449 


4,191 


District Totals 


796 


1,486 


698 


292 


1,927 


286 


594 


6,079 


J of. Total 


13.1% 


24.4% 


11.5% 


4.8% 


31.7% 


4.7% 


9.8% 


100.0% 


District 16 


















Robeson 


1,353 


4,328 


317 


1,471 


648 


1,148 


1,343 


10,608 


Scotland 


521 


1,558 


62 


506 


412 


582 


398 


4,039 


District Totals 


1,874 


5,886 


379 


1,977 


1,060 


1,730 


1,741 


14,647 


% of Total 


12.8% 


40.2% 


2.6% 


13.5% 


7.2% 


11.8% 


11.9% 


100.0% 



194 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

















Felony 






Worthless 
Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 


Plea 


Not 

Guilty 

Plea 


Dismissed 

by 
DA 


Other 


Probable 
Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 17A 

Caswell 

Rockingham 


52 
247 


197 
1,578 


102 
226 


240 
898 


130 
579 


112 
577 


56 
779 


889 
4,884 


District Totals 
% of Total 


299 
5.2* 


1,775 
30.7% 


328 

5.7% 


1,138 
19.7% 


709 
12.3% 


689 
11.9% 


835 

14.5% 


5,773 
100.0% 


District 17B 

Stokes 

Surry 


105 
225 


244 
1,177 


21 
227 


139 
516 


307 
794 


157 

249 


205 
522 


1,178 
3,710 


District Totals 
% of Total 


330 
6.8% 


1,421 
29.1% 


248 
5.1% 


655 
13.4% 


1,101 
22.5% 


406 
8.3% 


727 
14.9% 


4,888 
100.0% 


District 18 
Guilford 
% of Total 


1,504 
5.0% 


9,587 
32.1% 


1,291 
4.3% 


2,104 
7.1% 


10,609 
35.6% 


1,499 
5.0% 


3,246 
10.9% 


29,840 
100.0% 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 


625 
485 


1,430 
1,405 


176 
101 


710 
729 


997 
975 


367 

579 


975 
882 


5,280 
5,156 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,110 
10.6% 


2,835 
27.2% 


277 
2.7% 


1,439 
13.8% 


1,972 
18.9% 


946 
9.1% 


1,857 
17.8% 


10,436 
100.0% 


District 19B 

Montgomery 

Randolph 


177 

763 


516 
1,627 


1 
56 


343 
581 


533 
1,548 


532 

242 


111 
520 


2,213 
5,337 


District Totals 
% of Total 


940 
12.5% 


2,143 
28.4% 


57 
0.8% 


924 
12.2% 


2,081 
27.6% 


774 
10.3% 


631 
8.4% 


7,550 
100.0% 


District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 


95 
789 
224 
365 
715 


6 

827 

923 

632 

1,344 


167 

152 

42 

285 

136 


814 
362 
564 
345 
684 


429 
1,017 
753 
409 
973 


109 
507 
277 
137 
335 


165 
555 
388 

191 
455 


1,785 
4,209 
3,171 
2,364 
4,642 


District Totals 
% of Total 


2,188 
13.5% 


3,732 
23.1% 


782 

4.8% 


2,769 
17.1% 


3,581 
22.1% 


1,365 

8.4% 


1,754 
10.8% 


16,171 
100.0% 


District 21 
Forsyth 

% of Total 


1,693 
9.3% 


6,147 
33.9% 


1 

.0% 


2,268 

12.5% 


4,960 
27.4% 


882 
4.9% 


2,163 
11.9% 


18,114 
100.0% 


District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 


96 
304 

81 
617 


293 
2,152 

302 
1,988 


15 

247 



246 


146 

629 

88 

528 


438 
3,131 

315 
2,189 


203 
500 
138 
599 


70 
494 

43 
361 


1,261 

7,457 

967 

6,528 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,098 
6.8% 


4,735 
29.2% 


508 
3.1% 


1,391 
8.6% 


6,073 
37.5% 


1,440 
8.9% 


968 

6.0% 


16,213 
100.0% 


District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin' 


16 

91 

391 

50 


40 

190 

1,337 

268 


13 
4 

38 
3 


166 
139 
697 

167 


75 
11 

632 
126 


34 
192 
325 

119 


26 

97 

205 

99 


370 

724 

3,625 

832 


District Totals 
% of Total 


548 
9.9% 


1,835 
33.1% 


58 
1.0% 


1,169 
21.1% 


844 
15.2% 


670 
12.1% 


427 
7.7% 


5,551 
100.0% 



!95 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 
NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

















Felony 






Worthless 


Guilty 


Plea 


Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 






Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 
DA 


Other 


Cause 

Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 24 


















Avery 


48 


44 


19 


127 


295 


73 


29 


635 


Madison 


12 


66 


13 


69 


235 


98 


38 


531 


Mitchell 


39 


53 


27 


39 


166 


77 


76 


477 


Watauga 


255 


189 


38 


110 


389 


107 


162 


1,250 


Yancey 


29 


10 


40 


90 


109 


28 


22 


328 


District Totals 


383 


362 


137 


435 


1,194 


383 


327 


3,221 


% of Total 


11.9* 


11.2% 


4.3% 


13.5% 


37.1% 


11.9% 


10.2% 


100.0% 


District 25 


















Burke 


391 


1,237 


32 


264 


1,309 


573 


528 


4,334 


Caldwell 


275 


1,137 


349 


303 


1,034 


347 


497 


3,942 


Catawba 


684 


2,121 


177 


487 


1,736 


755 


997 


6,957 


District Totals 


1,350 


4,495 


558 


1,054 


4,079 


1,675 


2,022 


15,233 


% of Total 


8.9% 


29.5% 


3.7% 


6.9% 


26.8% 


11.0% 


13.3% 


100.0% 


District 26 


















Mecklenburg 


1,437 


12,146 


255 


1,884 


18,472 


3,028 


2,558 


39,780 


% of Total 


3.6% 


30.5% 


0.6% 


4.7% 


46.4% 


7.6% 


6.4% 


100.0% 


District, 27A 


















Gaston 


590 


3,686 


539 


994 


5,885 


1,242 


1,481 


14,417 


% of Total 


4.1% 


25.6% 


3.7% 


6.9% 


40.8% 


8.6% 


10.3% 


100.0% 


District 27B 


















Cleveland 


278 


1,410 


255 


370 


1,569 


515 


268 


4,665 


Lincoln 


453 


1,011 


131 


181 


1,097 


273 


224 


3,370 


District Totals 


731 


2,421 


386 


551 


2,666 


788 


492 


8,035 


J of Total 


9.1% 


30.1% 


4.8% 


6.9% 


33.2% 


9.8% 


6.1% 


100.0% 


District 28 


















Buncombe 


2,112 


6,116 


176 


542 


2,789 


263 


720 


12,718 


% of Total 


16.6% 


48.1% 


1.4% 


4.3% 


21.9% 


2.1% 


5.7% 


100.0% 


District 29 


















Henderson 


284 


1,209 


181 


137 


946 


178 


215 


3,150 


McDowell 


74 


390 


245 


219 


267 


46 


236 


1,477 


Polk 


16 


215 


9 


24 


173 


70 


47 


554 


Rutherford 


150 


1,010 


233 


462 


561 


480 


345 


3,241 


Transylvania 


53 


703 


161 


26 


438 


51 


113 


1,545 


District Totals 


577 


3,527 


829 


868 


2,385 


825 


956 


9,967 


% of Total 


5.8% 


35.4% 


8.3% 


8.7% 


23.9% 


8.3% 


9.6% 


100.0% 


District 30 


















Cherokee 


156 


254 


1 


5 


313 


148 


2 


879 


Clay 


29 


70 


64 


12 


62 


2 


19 


258 


Graham 


1 


99 


47 


60 


134 


1 


17 


359 


Haywood 


141 


583 


81 


154 


940 


89 


249 


2,240 


Jack3on 


39 


199 


79 


33 


188 


126 


170 


834 


'^aoon 


26 


173 


3 


32 


154 


200 


88 


676 


Swain 


14 


105 


107 


37 


223 


20 


95 


601 


District Totals 


409 


1,483 


382 


333 


2,014 


586 


640 


5,847 


% of Total 


7.0% 


25.4% 


6.5% 


5.7% 


34.4% 


10.0% 


10.9% 


100.0% 


State Totals 


54,194 


144,462 


15,562 


42,709 


124,879 


32,216 


42,677 


456,699 


% of Total 


11.9% 


31.6% 


3.4% 


9.4% 


27.3% 


7.1% 


9.3% 


100.0% 



196 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 


19 
30 
34 

443 
27 

153 
35 


1 

4 
1 

6 

6 
1 



5 

1 

10 



3 

1 



2 
3 
8 

23 
4 



1 

4 



1 











20 
42 
39 

471 
27 

185 
42 


24.8 
67.9 
45.0 
32.9 
21.1 
54.4 
48.3 


20.0 
22.0 
35.0 
15.0 
20.0 
20.0 
14.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


741 
89.7% 


19 
2.3% 


20 
2.4% 


40 
4.8% 


6 
0.7% 



0.0% 


826 
100.0% 


40.2 


19.0 


District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 


183 
61 
99 
23 
31 


10 




1 

4 


36 
1 

5 


1 


70 
4 
4 




16 
1 
1 







5 




315 

67 
114 

24 
36 


118.8 
40.3 
88.2 
19.2 
34.4 


46.0 
13.0 
29.0 
8.0 
22.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


397 
71.4% 


15 
2.7% 


43 
7.7% 


78 
14.0% 


18 
3.2% 


5 
0.9% 


556 
100.0% 


93.3 


28.0 


District 3 

Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 


634 

637 

48 

1,059 


64 

78 

5 

95 


90 

85 

9 

98 


125 
89 

14 
46 


62 

23 

2 




5 
13 






980 

925 

78 

1,298 


109.7 

94.5 
87.8 
50.8 


50.0 
42.0 
43.0 
32.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


2,378 
72.5% 


242 
7.4% 


282 

8.6% 


274 
8.4% 


37 
2.7% 


18 
0.5% 


3,281 
100.0% 


81.6 


41.0 


District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 


221 

23 

980 

342 


6 

4 

61 

33 


12 

2 

110 

24 


4 

5 

55 

17 




1 
5 











243 

35 

1,211 

416 


38.1 
83.5 
53.8 
50.7 


21.0 
50.0 
29.0 
34.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,566 
82.2% 


104 
5.5% 


148 
7.8% 


81 
4.3% 


6 
0.3% 



0.0% 


1,905 
100.0% 


51.6 


29.0 


District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 


1,410 
182 


137 
24 


137 
12 


272 

22 


203 

31 


107 
9 


2,266 

280 


162.5 
139.1 


50.0 
49.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


1,592 
62.5% 


161 
6.3% 


149 
5.9% 


294 
11.5% 


234 
9.2% 


116 
4.6% 


2,546 
100.0% 


159.9 


50.0 


District 6 

Bertie 

Halifax 

Hertford 

Northampton 


76 

482 

94 

68 


1 

58 






5 

107 
5 

3 


1 

27 

4 

3 



5 
2 

4 









83 
679 

105 
78 


32.0 
63.6 
43.8 
63.2 


21.0 
32.0 
19.0 
22.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


720 
76.2% 


59 
6.2% 


120 
12.7% 


35 
3.7% 


11 
1.2% 



0.0% 


945 
100.0% 


58.6 


29.0 


District 7 
Edgecombe 
Nash 
Wilson 


770 
908 
778 


85 
81 

160 


11 1 
119 

121 


185 

75 

194 


38 
56 


2 
3 

22 


1,191 
1,230 
1,331 


97.9 

80.0 
112.9 


57.0 
39.0 
62.0 


District Totals 
% of Total 


2,456 

65.5% 


326 
8.7% 


351 
9.4% 


454 
12.1% 


138 
3.7% 


27 
0.7% 


3,752 
100.0% 


97.3 


50.0 



197 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 8 




















3reene 


74 


14 


36 


71 


35 


3 


233 


206.8 


162.0 


Lenoir 


608 


81 


84 


59 


15 


1 


848 


74.0 


43.0 


Wayne 


784 


111 


111 


57 


9 





1,072 


65.2 


42.0 


District Totals 


1,466 


206 


231 


187 


59 


4 


2,153 


84.0 


48.0 


% of Total 


68. U 


9.6% 


10.7% 


8.7% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 9 




















Franklin 


145 


14 


14 


18 


8 





199 


80.8 


42.0 


Granville 


171 


16 


2 


30 


6 





225 


74.8 


22.0 


Person 


176 


13 


7 


38 


5 





239 


79.8 


27.0 


Vance 


179 


23 


18 


42 


17 


2 


281 


112.9 


54.0 


Warren 


74 


6 


8 


8 


13 


6 


115 


158.5 


67.0 


District Totals 


745 


72 


49 


136 


49 


8 


1,059 


96.2 


39.0 


% of Total 


70. 3% 


6.8% 


4.6% 


12.8% 


4.6% 


0.8% 


100.0% 






District 10 




















Wake 


4,252 


688 


768 


1,205 


456 


254 


7,623 


154.0 


81.0 


% of Total 


55.8% 


9.0% 


10.1% 


15.8% 


6.0% 


3.3% 


100.0% 






District 11 




















Harnett 


401 


45 


52 


25 


17 


21 


561 


132.6 


34.0 


Johnston 


579 


50 


66 


41 


5 





741 


60.7 


34.0 


Lee 


354 


26 


24 


12 








416 


39.3 


19.0 


District Totals 


1,334 


121 


142 


78 


22 


21 


1,718 


79.0 


30.0 


% of Total 


77.6% 


7.0% 


8.3% 


4.5% 


1.3% 


1.2% 


100.0% 






District 12 




















Cumberland 


2,812 


423 


551 


629 


125 


8 


4,548 


98.2 


63.0 


Hoke 


225 


20 


8 


22 


20 


4 


299 


96.3 


33.0 


District Totals 


3,037 


443 


559 


651 


145 


12 


4,847 


98.0 


61.0 


% of Total 


62.7% 


9.1% 


11.5% 


13.4% 


3.0% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 13 




















Bladen 


314 


10 


11 


5 


6 





346 


46.7 


28.0 


Brunswick 


380 


27 


22 


46 


16 


1 


492 


77.1 


34.0 


Columbus 


399 


2?- 


11 


27 


9 


1 


469 


63.3 


29.0 


District Totals 


1,093 


59 


44 


78 


31 


2 


1,307 


64.1 


28.0 


% of Total 


83.6% 


4.5% 


3.4% 


6.0% 


2.4% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 14 




















Durham 


2,242 


428 


349 


624 


486 


387 


4,516 


212.4 


92.0 


% of Total 


49.6% 


9.5% 


7.7% 


13.8% 


10.8% 


8.6% 


100.0% 






District 15A 




















Alamance 


706 


59 


63 


72 


17 


1 


918 


70.9 


40.0 


* of Total 


76.9% 


6.4% 


6.9% 


7.8% 


1.9% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 15B 




















Chatham 


197 


17 


5 


16 


6 





241 


63.3 


33.0 


Orange 


516 


74 


'/i 


49 


11 


21 


730 


123.8 


39.0 


District Totals 


713 


91 


64 


65 


17 


21 


971 


108.8 


35.0 


% of Total 


73.4% 


9.4% 


6.6% 


6.7% 


1.8% 


2.2% 


100.0% 






District 16 




















Robeson 


857 


70 


89 


59 


19 


1 


1,095 


65.8 


32.0 


Coot land 


242 


15 


J 4 


18 


5 


6 


320 


90.7 


29.0 


District Totals 


1,099 


85 


123 


77 


24 


7 


1,415 


71.4 


32.0 


% of Total 


77.7% 


6.0% 


8.7% 


5.4% 


1.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 







1 98 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


93 


7 





5 


1 





106 


37.3 


21.0 


Rockingham 


523 


25 


12 


52 


5 





617 


53.6 


20.0 


District Totals 


616 


32 


12 


57 


6 





723 


51.2 


21.0 


% of Total 


85. 2% 


4.4% 


1.7% 


7.9% 


0.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 17B 




















Stokes 


149 


30 


7 


6 








192 


56.7 


48.0 


Surry 


427 


33 


22 


3 


1 





486 


40.7 


25.0 


District Totals 


576 


63 


29 


9 


1 





678 


45.2 


28.0 


% of Total 


85.0% 


9.3% 


4.3% 


1.3% 


0.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18 




















Guilford 


5,536 


1,077 


1,112 


2,002 


1,010 


88 


10,825 


141.9 


85.0 


% of Total 


51. 1% 


9.9% 


10.3% 


18.5% 


9.3% 


0.8% 


100.0% 






District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


539 


26 


17 


40 


10 





632 


54.0 


29.0 


Rowan 


482 


29 


25 


25 


10 





571 


50.4 


20.0 


District Totals 


1,021 


55 


42 


65 


20 





1,203 


52.3 


26.0 


% of Total 


84.9% 


4.6% 


3.5% 


5.4% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 19B 




















Montgomery 


283 


19 


14 


20 


15 


3 


354 


76.1 


28.0 


Randolph 


762 


70 


81 


85 


78 


2 


1,078 


95.3 


48.0 


District Totals 


1,045 


89 


95 


105 


93 


5 


1,432 


90.5 


40.0 


% of Total 


73.0% 


6.2% 


6.6% 


7.3% 


6.5% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 20 




















Anson 


169 


4 


8 


10 


3 





194 


49.3 


20.0 


Moore 


427 


24 


22 


16 


17 


4 


510 


61.1 


18.0 


Richmond 


205 


21 


13 


39 


6 


2 


286 


89.1 


26.0 


Stanly 


241 


1 


3 


6 


1 





252 


30.8 


18.0 


Union 


451 


22 


59 


94 


28 


45 


699 


251.7 


43.0 


District Totals 


1,493 


12 


105 


165 


55 


51 


1,941 


128.8 


25.0 


% of Total 


76.9% 


3.7% 


5.4% 


8.5% 


2.8% 


2.6% 


100.0% 






District 21 




















Forsyth 


1,814 


164 


272 


506 


580 


514 


3,850 


273.1 


109.0 


% of Total 


47.1% 


4.3% 


7.1% 


13.1% 


15.1% 


13.4% 


100.0% 






District 22 




















Alexander 


133 


8 


1 1 


22 








174 


75.8 


48.0 


Davidson 


939 


81 


74 


101 


92 


5 


1,292 


96.8 


35.0 


Davie 


115 


15 


26 


38 


4 





198 


113.4 


70.0 


Iredell 


755 


55 


38 


56 


28 


13 


945 


80.5 


40.0 


District Totals 


1,942 


159 


149 


217 


124 


18 


2,609 


90.7 


41.0 


% of Total 


74.4% 


6.1% 


5.7% 


8.3% 


4.8% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 2~\ 




















Alleghany 


24 


1 





4 








29 


50.9 


15.0 


Ashe 


39 


5 


7 


4 


4 


7 


66 


220.7 


48.0 


Wilkes 


314 


36 


31 


54 


42 


48 


525 


188.3 


53.0 


Yadkin 


71 


4 


1 


3 








79 


36.1 


22.0 


District Totals 


448 


46 


39 


65 


46 


55 


699 


168.4 


39.0 


% of Total 


64.1% 


6.6% 


5.6% 


9.3% 


6.6% 


7.9% 


100.0% 







199 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1987 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 24 




















Avery 


77 


14 


26 


49 


20 


3 


189 


174.5 


134.0 


Madison 


78 


11 


29 


13 


11 


2 


144 


132.7 


70.0 


Mitchell 


65 


5 


8 


10 


9 


1 


98 


123.5 


36.0 


Watauga 


181 


25 


19 


45 


8 





278 


97.0 


64.0 


Yancey 


32 


2 


4 











38 


52.5 


49.0 


District Totals 


433 


57 


86 


117 


48 


6 


747 


124.7 


64.0 


% of Total 


58.0$ 


7.6% 


11.5% 


15.7% 


6.4% 


0.8% 


100.0% 






District 25 




















Burke 


399 


15 


22 


26 


2 


1 


465 


51.2 


27.0 


Caldwell 


623 


47 


39 


68 


1 


1 


779 


57.6 


22.0 


Catawba 


861 


116 


116 


61 


2 


12 


1,168 


78.0 


40.0 


District Totals 


1,883 


178 


177 


155 


5 


14 


2,412 


66.2 


33.0 


% of Total 


78.1% 


7.4% 


7.3% 


6.4% 


0.2% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


5,038 


999 


1,277 


1,485 


676 


173 


9,648 


140.2 


84.0 


% of Total 


52.25 


10.4% 


13.2% 


15.4% 


7.0% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 27A 




















Gaston 


2,403 


293 


177 


264 


113 


46 


3,296 


97.5 


41.0 


% of Total 


72.9% 


8.9% 


5.4% 


8.0% 


3.4% 


1.4% 


100.0% 






District 27B 




















Cleveland 


441 


38 


13 


28 


4 


5 


529 


61.5 


28.0 


Lincoln 


280 


20 


5 


12 


7 


6 


330 


69.1 


26.0 


District Totals 


721 


58 


18 


40 


11 


11 


859 


64.4 


27.0 


% of Total 


83.9% 


6.8% 


2.1% 


4.7% 


1.3% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






District 28 




















Buncombe 


1,333 


109 


154 


73 


14 





1,683 


53.4 


25.0 


% of Total 


79.2% 


6.5% 


9.2% 


4.3% 


0.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 




















Henderson 


371 


42 


32 


51 


49 


19 


564 


139.1 


43.0 


McDowell 


233 


10 


16 


25 


16 


1 


301 


83.7 


33.0 


Polk 


78 


3 


12 


9 





2 


104 


79.3 


40.0 


Rutherford 


613 


80 


79 


177 


136 


43 


1,128 


175.6 


68.0 


Transylvania 


181 


67 


12 


17 


8 





285 


78.5 


56.0 


District Totals 


1,476 


202 


151 


279 


209 


65 


2,382 


139.5 


49.0 


% of Total 


62.0% 


8.5% 


6.3% 


11.7% 


8.8% 


2.7% 


100.0% 






District 30 




















Cherokee 


254 


120 


62 


169 


193 


33 


831 


253.7 


146.0 


Clay 


28 





1 


4 


2 





35 


73.6 


15.0 


Graham 


29 


2 


1 


1 








33 


42.9 


19.0 


-lay wood 


277 


10 


40 


27 


21 


2 


377 


87.8 


34.0 


Jack3on 


65 


4 


2 


6 


4 


2 


83 


88.8 


39.0 


Macon 


55 


9 


5 


23 


5 


26 


123 


381.8 


111.0 


Swain 


38 


3 


2 


7 


2 


1 


53 


105.4 


39.0 


District Totals 


746 


148 


113 


237 


227 


64 


1,535 


200.5 


92.0 


% of Total 


48.6% 


9.6% 


7.4% 


15.4% 


14.8% 


4.2% 


100.0% 






State Total3 


55,061 


6,979 


7,513 


10,270 


5,044 


1,993 


86,860 


124.6 


54.0 


% of Total 


63.4% 


8.0% 


8.6% 


11.8% 


5.8% 


2.3% 


100.0% 







200 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 



0-90 



91-120 



121-180 



181-365 



366-730 



District 1 



Camden 


158 


5 


2 


3 





Chowan 


556 


13 


4 


8 


2 


Currituck 


364 


7 


6 


9 


2 


Dare 


2,195 


73 


64 


32 


46 


Gates 


281 


2 


7 


3 





Pasquotank 


2,030 


51 


30 


15 


5 


Perquimans 


417 


8 


16 


10 


10 


District Totals 


6,001 


159 


129 


80 


65 


% of Total 


93.3% 


2.5% 


2.0% 


1.2% 


1.0% 


District 2 












Beaufort 


2,878 


32 


19 


23 


18 


Hyde 


492 


4 





1 





Martin 


1,187 


32 


26 


29 


16 


Tyrrell 


171 


4 











Washington 


690 


10 





12 


1 


District Totals 


5,418 


82 


45 


65 


35 


% of Total 


95. 7% 


1.4% 


0.8% 


1.1% 


0.6% 


District 3 












Carteret 


3,620 


326 


348 


297 


36 


Craven 


5,098 


365 


361 


257 


51 


Pamlico 


624 


28 


31 


9 


6 


Pitt 


10,396 


698 


588 


503 


37 


District Totals 


19,738 


1,417 


1,328 


1,066 


130 


% of Total 


83.3% 


6.0% 


5.6% 


4.5% 


0.5% 


District 4 












Duplin 


2,313 


67 


44 


40 


7 


Jones 


563 


23 


5 


7 


6 


Onslow 


10,224 


458 


466 


268 


11 


Sampson 


2,702 


166 


98 


34 


3 


District Totals 


15,802 


714 


613 


349 


27 


% of Total 


90.25 


4.1% 


3.5% 


2.0% 


0.2% 


District 5 












New Hanover 


11,665 


527 


425 


397 


212 


Pender 


1,326 


59 


40 


34 


47 


District Totals 


12,991 


586 


465 


431 


259 


% of Total 


87.9% 


4.0% 


3.1% 


2.9% 


1.8% 


District 6 












Bertie 


1,158 


20 


23 


7 


4 


Halifax 


3,819 


189 


111 


160 


48 


Hertford 


1,768 


36 


30 


15 


9 


Northampton 


919 


11 


19 


9 


3 


District Totals 


7,664 


256 


183 


191 


64 


% of Total 


91.7% 


3.1% 


2.2% 


2.3% 


0.8% 


District 7 













Edgecombe 4,662 359 376 266 

Nash 5,922 467 481 407 

Wilson 3,982 425 386 378 

District Totals 14,566 1,251 1,243 1,051 

% of Total 79.4% 6.8% 6.8% 5.7% 



66 
41 
90 

197 
1.15 



>730 









1 



1 

.0% 



5 


11 




16 
0.3% 




5 



5 

.0% 



9 





9 
0.1% 



35 

6 

41 
0.3% 










0.0% 



4 
15 
12 

31 
0.2% 



Total 


Mean 


Median 


)isposed 


Age 


Age 


168 


29.2 


20.0 


583 


26.9 


18.0 


388 


37.7 


23.0 


2,410 


41.2 


23.0 


293 


30.2 


22.0 


2,132 


29.3 


20.0 


461 


44.2 


22.0 


6,435 


35.2 


21.0 


100.0% 






2,975 


25.7 


13.0 


497 


21.1 


16.0 


1,301 


41.1 


13.0 


175 


20.3 


16.0 


713 


20.1 


13.0 


5,661 


28.0 


14.0 


100.0% 






4,627 


60.0 


33.0 


6,137 


49.7 


24.0 


698 


37.8 


17.0 


12,222 


48.6 


28.0 


23,684 


50.8 


28.0 


100.0% 






2,480 


35.1 


20.0 


604 


30.0 


15.0 


11,427 


36.8 


20.0 


3,003 


40.0 


29.0 


17,514 


36.9 


22.0 


100.0% 






13,261 


49.4 


24.0 


1,512 


54.4 


24.0 


14,773 


49.9 


24.0 


100.0% 






1,212 


25.4 


15.0 


4,327 


45.7 


26.0 


1,858 


30.2 


21.0 


961 


23.6 


7.0 


8,358 


36.8 


21.0 


100.0% 






5,733 


56.7 


29.0 


7,333 


57.1 


30.0 


5,273 


68.8 


35.0 


18,339 


60.3 


32.0 


100.0% 







201 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 

>730 









0.0% 




9 

15 


24 
0.2% 



34 
0.1% 



0.1% 



6 


6 

.0% 



3 

i 
1 

5 

0.1% 



212 

1.4% 



1 

.0% 




5 

5 
0. 1% 




28 

28 
0.2% 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


District 8 












Greene 


569 


49 


37 


23 


12 


Lenoir 


3,522 


356 


373 


217 


22 


Wayne 


4,918 


463 


516 


327 


42 


District Totals 


9,009 


868 


926 


567 


76 


J of Total 


78.7% 


7.6% 


8.1% 


5.0% 


0.7% 


District 9 












Franklin 


1,702 


71 


b0 


44 


2 


Granville 


1,941 


54 


65 


47 


10 


Person 


1,570 


55 


55 


32 


15 


Vance 


3,257 


191 


140 


118 


22 


Warren 


899 


30 


15 


20 


5 


District Totals 


9,369 


401 


335 


261 


54 


% of Total 


89.7% 


3.8% 


3.2% 


2.5% 


0.5% 


District 10 












Wake 


23,476 


2,154 


1,888 


2,141 


439 


% of Total 


77.9% 


7.1% 


6.3% 


7.1% 


1.5% 


District 11 












Harnett 


3,613 


181 


102 


87 


15 


Johnston 


4,706 


201 


189 


127 


3 


Lee 


3,572 


164 


122 


62 


15 


District Totals 


11,891 


546 


413 


276 


33 


% of Total 


90.3% 


4.1% 


3.1% 


2.1% 


0.3% 


District 12 












Cumberland 


14,139 


1,613 


2,084 


2,132 


146 


Hoke 


1 ,486 


122 


107 


61 


15 


District Totals 


15,625 


1,735 


2,191 


2,193 


161 


% of Total 


71.3% 


7.9% 


10.0% 


10.0% 


0.7% 


District 13 












Eladen 


1,866 


89 


119 


55 


28 


Brunswick 


2,457 


187 


144 


103 


24 


Columbus 


2,919 


176 


117 


97 


4 


District Totals 


7,242 


452 


380 


255 


56 


% of Total 


86.3% 


5.4% 


4.5% 


3.0% 


0.7% 


District 14 












Durham 


11,166 


1,249 


1,532 


1,106 


185 


% of Total 


72.3% 


8.1% 


9.9% 


7.2% 


1.2% 


District 1 5A 












Alamance 


5,955 


190 


198 


95 


76 


% of Total 


91.4% 


2.9% 


3.0% 


1.5% 


1.2% 


District 15B 












Chatham 


1,612 


108 


80 


64 


24 


Orange 


3,457 


234 


210 


224 


61 


District Totals 


5,069 


342 


290 


288 


85 


% of Total 


83.4% 


5.6% 


4.8% 


4.7% 


1.4% 


District 16 












Robeson 


9,816 


290 


357 


138 


7 


'.'.-,'.. ar.d 


3,798 


88 


77 


i<> 


12 


District Total3 


13,614 


378 


434 


174 


19 


% of Total 


92.9% 


2.6% 


3.0% 


1.2% 


0.1% 



Total 


Mean 


Median 


Disposed 


Age 


Age 


690 


53.8 


27.0 


4,490 


60.5 


38.0 


6,266 


60.4 


37.0 


11,446 


60.0 


37.0 


100.0% 






1,879 


33.7 


18.0 


2,126 


42.7 


19.0 


1,727 


40.7 


25.0 


3,743 


44.3 


16.0 


969 


29.0 


14.0 


10,444 


40.0 


19.0 


100.0% 






30,132 


66.3 


38.0 


100.0% 






4,003 


37.4 


21.0 


5,227 


37.9 


22.0 


3,937 


34.2 


17.0 


13,167 


36.6 


20.0 


100.0% 






20,120 


74.1 


39.0 


1,791 


53.2 


31.0 


21,911 


72.3 


39.0 


100.0% 






2,160 


51.2 


27.0 


2,916 


52.4 


33.0 


3,314 


40.9 


24.0 


8,390 


47.5 


28.0 


100.0% 






15,450 


82.2 


41.0 


100.0% 






6,515 


39.6 


22.0 


100.0% 






1,888 


48.8 


26.0 


4,191 


57.7 


30.0 


6,079 


54.9 


29.0 


100.0% 






10,608 


29.0 


14.0 


4,039 


36.6 


16.0 


14,647 


31.1 


15.0 


100.0% 







202 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


860 


13 


5 


7 


4 





889 


26.8 


19.0 


Rockingham 


4,592 


98 


120 


63 


11 





4,884 


33.0 


22.0 


District Totals 


5,452 


111 


125 


70 


15 





5,773 


32.0 


22.0 


% of Total 


94.4% 


1.9% 


2.2% 


1.2% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 17B 




















Stokes 


1,038 


70 


51 


18 


1 





1,178 


43.5 


29.0 


Surry 


3,260 


189 


207 


52 


2 





3,710 


47.5 


36.0 


District Totals 


4,298 


259 


258 


70 


3 





4,888 


46.5 


35.0 


% of Total 


87.9% 


5.3% 


5.3% 


1.4% 


0.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18 




















Guilford 


18,647 


2,845 


3,434 


3,774 


1,077 


63 


29,840 


99.4 


62.0 


% of Total 


62. 51 


9.5% 


11.5% 


12.6% 


3.6% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


4,869 


191 


100 


85 


35 





5,280 


39.6 


27.0 


Rowan 


4,702 


198 


149 


95 


12 





5,156 


38.0 


24.0 


District Totals 


9,571 


389 


249 


180 


47 





10,436 


38.8 


26.0 


J of Total 


91. 7% 


3.7% 


2.4% 


1.7% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 19B 




















Montgomery 


1,925 


81 


90 


110 


6 


1 


2,213 


45.6 


26.0 


Randolph 


4,688 


284 


240 


108 


16 


1 


5,337 


49.1 


38.0 


District Totals 


6,613 


365 


330 


218 


22 


2 


7,550 


48.1 


34.0 


% of Total 


87.6% 


4.8% 


4.4% 


2.9% 


0.3% 


.0% 


100.0% 






District 20 




















Anson 


1,635 


83 


35 


24 


8 





1,785 


38.2 


23.0 


Moore 


3,732 


123 


136 


129 


87 


2 


4,209 


46.3 


21.0 


Richmond 


3,047 


47 


61 


13 


3 





3,171 


26.0 


16.0 


Stanly 


2,242 


51 


47 


20 


4 





2,364 


30.5 


21.0 


Union 


4,445 


97 


58 


41 


1 





4,642 


29.1 


20.0 


District Totals 


15,101 


401 


337 


227 


103 


2 


16,171 


34.2 


20.0 


% of Total 


93.4% 


2.5% 


2.1% 


1.4% 


0.6% 


.0% 


100.0% 






District 21 




















Forsyth 


17,203 


331 


247 


166 


120 


47 


18,114 


35.7 


22.0 


% of Total 


95.0% 


1.8% 


1.4% 


0.9% 


0.7% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 22 




















Alexander 


1,094 


78 


55 


25 


8 


1 


1,261 


48.4 


31.0 


Davidson 


6,251 


473 


321 


274 


131 


7 


7,457 


58.0 


32.0 


Davie 


858 


47 


36 


13 


10 


3 


967 


56.7 


31.0 


Iredell 


5,593 


430 


295 


157 


42 


11 


6,528 


51 .0 


31.0 


District Totals 


13,796 


1,028 


707 


469 


191 


22 


16,213 


54.3 


31.0 


% of Total 


85.1% 


6.3% 


4.4% 


2.9% 


1.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 23 




















Alleghany 


331 


10 


25 


3 


1 





370 


38.9 


25.0 


Ashe 


681 


21 


11 


9 


1 


1 


724 


28.5 


15.0 


Wilkes 


3,302 


149 


63 


60 


19 


32 


3,625 


44.1 


17.0 


Yadkin 


765 


47 


12 


8 








832 


33.0 


21.0 


District Totals 


5,079 


227 


111 


80 


21 


33 


5,551 


40.1 


17.0 


% of Total 


91.5% 


4.1% 


2.0% 


1.4% 


0.4% 


0.6% 


100.0% 







203 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1986 — June 30, 1987 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 





0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 
Age 


District 24 




















Avery 


471 


35 


34 


34 


58 


3 


635 


102.5 


41.0 


Madison 


372 


47 


24 


56 


31 


1 


531 


96.8 


51.0 


Mitchell 


415 


29 


14 


14 


5 





477 


52.3 


35.0 


Watauga 


1,003 


78 


63 


86 


18 


2 


1,250 


63.0 


34.0 


Yancey 


268 


16 


13 


22 


9 





328 


65.6 


40.0 


District Totals 


2,529 


205 


148 


212 


121 


6 


3,221 


75.0 


38.0 


I of Total 


78. 5% 


6.4% 


4.6% 


6.6% 


3.8% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 25 




















Burke 


3,580 


249 


250 


225 


28 


2 


4,334 


52.8 


27.0 


Caldwell 


3,198 


247 


198 


257 


40 


2 


3,942 


59.2 


32.0 


Catawba 


5,933 


361 


295 


353 


13 


2 


6,957 


48.9 


27.0 


District Totals 


12,711 


857 


743 


835 


81 


6 


15,233 


52.7 


28.0 


% of Total 


83.41 


5.6% 


4.9% 


5.5% 


0.5% 


.0% 


100.0% 






District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


26,450 


4,482 


3,669 


3,851 


1,114 


214 


39,780 


85.8 


42.0 


t of Total 


66.5% 


11.3% 


9.2% 


9.7% 


2.8% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 27A 




















Gaston 


10,427 


1,208 


1,475 


927 


372 


8 


14,417 


80.0 


53.0 


% of Total 


72.3% 


8.4% 


10.2% 


6.4% 


2.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 27B 




















Cleveland 


4,281 


165 


127 


33 


8 


1 


4,665 


36.5 


23.0 


Lincoln 


3,058 


154 


57 


73 


24 


4 


3,370 


43.4 


27.0 


District Totals 


7,339 


319 


184 


156 


32 


5 


8,035 


39.4 


25.0 


% of Total 


91.3% 


4.0% 


2.3% 


1.9% 


0.4% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 28 




















Buncombe 


11,273 


417 


373 


520 


135 





12,718 


46.6 


25.0 


% of Total 


88.65 


3.3% 


2.9% 


4.1% 


1.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 




















Henderson 


2,706 


178 


130 


87 


47 


2 


3,150 


53.0 


31.0 


McDowell 


1 ,312 


76 


44 


34 


10 


1 


1,477 


45.2 


29.0 


Polk 


474 


43 


27 


8 


1 


1 


554 


43.6 


27.0 


Rutherford 


2,567 


253 


166 


138 


106 


12 


3,241 


75.2 


39.0 


Transylvania 


1,217 


115 


89 


82 


34 


8 


1,545 


65.6 


27.0 


District Totals 


8,276 


665 


455 


349 


198 


24 


9,967 


60.5 


33.0 


% of Total 


83. 0% 


6.7% 


4.6% 


3.5% 


2.0% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 30 




















Cherokee 


552 


157 


87 


62 


5 


16 


879 


96.8 


63.0 


Clay 


237 


9 


6 


5 


1 





258 


34.7 


17.0 


Graham 


289 


49 


7 


13 


1 





359 


49.8 


32.0 


Haywood 


1,996 


76 


80 


51 


26 


8 


2,240 


47.1 


24.0 


J a c k s o r, 


771 


16 


14 


29 


1 


4 


834 


37.3 


19.0 


Macon 


590 


35 


18 


25 


4 


4 


676 


52.4 


27.0 


Swain 


554 


24 


20 


1 


2 





601 


46.9 


36.0 


District Totals 


4,989 


368 


232 


186 


40 


32 


5,847 


53.4 


29.0 


% of Total 


85.3% 


6.3% 


4.0% 


3.2% 


0.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


374,350 


27,257 


25,670 


22,879 


5,653 


890 


456,699 


57.3 


29.0 


% of Total 


82.0% 


6.0% 


5.6% 


5.0% 


1.2% 


0.2% 


100.0% 







204 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

September 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Total 
Filed 



Waiver 



Dispositions 



Other 



Total Dispositions 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 



770 
1,002 
2,179 
6,051 
1,263 
1,404 
1,086 

13,755 



641 

792 
1,630 
4,547 

917 
1,018 

828 

10,373 



42 

63 

74 

363 

156 

107 

97 

902 



683 
855 
1,704 
4,910 
1,073 
1,125 
925 

11,275 



District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 



4,786 
583 
3,144 
1,083 
1,107 



3,494 
311 

1,808 
721 
769 



907 
153 
518 

141 

194 



4,401 
464 

2,326 
862 
963 



District Totals 



10,703 



7,103 



1,913 



9,016 



District 3 
Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 

Pitt 

District Totals 



6,518 

7,465 

812 

10,084 

24,879 



4,194 

4,762 

447 

5,966 

15,369 



798 
1,323 

202 
2,863 

5,186 



4,992 

6,085 

649 

8,829 

20,555 



District 4 

Duplin 

Jones 

Onslow 

Sampson 

District Totals 



2,688 

924 

7,220 

5,417 

16,249 



1,607 

541 

4,408 

3,152 

9,708 



1,681 
1,034 

3,091 



1,795 

729 

6,089 

4,186 

12,799 



District 5 
New Hanover 
Pender 

District Totals 



10,308 
2,069 

12,377 



6,075 
1,021 

7,096 



3,071 
518 

3,589 



9,146 
1,539 

10,685 



District 6 




Bertie 


2,629 


Halifax 


7,782 


Hertford 


2,119 


Northampton 


2,810 


District Totals 


15,340 


District 7 




Edgecombe 


4,907 


Nash 


5,756 


Wilson 


3,836 



District Totals 



14,499 



1,812 
3,945 
1,443 
2,256 

9,456 



3,132 
4,083 
2,251 

9,466 



385 
624 
501 
419 

1,929 



508 
673 
439 

1,620 



2,197 
4,569 
1,944 
2,675 

11,385 



3,640 
4,756 
2,690 

11,086 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 

District Totals 



1,362 
4,545 
5,029 

10,936 



836 
2,210 

2,741 

5,787 



286 

997 

1,334 

2,617 



1,122 
3,207 
4,075 

8,404 



"Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. 



205 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

September 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Dispositions 



District 9 



Cumberland 
Hoke 

District Totals 

District 13 



Robeson 
Scotland 

District Totals 

District 17A 

Caswell 

Rockingham 

District Totals 

District 17B 

Stores 

Surry 

District Totals 



Total 
Filed 



Franklin 




1,922 


Granville 




2,685 


Person 




1,959 


Vance 




2,558 


Warren 




943 


District 


Totals 


10,067 


District 10 






Wake 




31,758 


District 11 






Harnett 




4,402 


Johnston 




8,308 


Lee 




2,478 


District 


Totals 


15,188 


District 12 







18,103 
2,503 

20,606 



Bladen 


3,532 


Brunswick 


4,596 


Columbus 


3,551 


District Totals 


11,679 


District 14 




Durham 


18,199 


District 15A 




Alamance 


6,703 


District 15B 




Chatham 


5,188 


Orange 


6,496 


District Totals 


11,684 


District 16 





7,408 
2,339 

9,747 



1,887 
5,909 

7,796 



1,591 
4,669 

6,260 



Waiver 



1,092 
1,722 
1,104 
1,659 
596 

6,173 



14,075 



2,538 
4,274 
1,440 

8,252 



11,841 
1,694 

13,535 



1,814 
1,378 
1,859 

5,051 



10,808 



4,063 



2,840 
3,320 

6,160 



5,271 
1,760 

7,031 



1,212 

4,113 

5,325 



913 
2,851 

3,764 



Other 

532 
385 
527 
540 
146 

2,130 
9,977 



785 

1,874 

537 

3,196 



3,209 
363 

3,572 



899 

1,061 

941 

2,901 
4,057 

1,743 



1,216 
1,323 

2,539 



924 
447 

1,371 



334 
1,035 

1,369 



292 
703 

995 



Total Dispositions 



1,624 
2,107 
1,631 
2,199 
742 

8,303 



24,052 



3,323 
6,148 
1,977 

11,448 



15,050 
2,057 

17,107 



2,713 
2,439 
2,800 

7,952 



14,865 



5,806 



4,056 
4,643 

8,699 



6,195 
2,207 

8,402 



1,546 
5,148 

6,694 



1,205 
3,554 

4,759 



^Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. 



206 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

September 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 



Total 
Filed 



Waiver 



Dispositions 



Other 



Total Dispositions 



District 18 
Guilford 



31,441 



16,213 



8,712 



24,925 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 

Rowan 

District Totals 



District Totals 

District 21 
Forsyth 



7,284 
5,770 

13,054 



District 19B 




Montgomery 


1,793 


Randolph 


5,329 


District Totals 


7,122 


District 20 




Anson 


1,864 


Moore 


3,592 


Richmond 


2,634 


Stanly 


2,175 


Union 


4,387 



14,652 



20,029 



4,850 
3,866 

8,716 



1,088 
3,135 

4,223 



1,161 
2,154 
1,780 
1,552 
3,010 

9,657 



9,563 



1,436 
1,149 

2,585 



355 
1,190 

1,545 



429 

1,048 

545 

349 

1,065 

3,436 
6,978 



6,286 
5,015 

11,301 



1,443 
4,325 

5,768 



1,590 
3,202 
2,325 
1,901 
4,075 

13,093 



16,541 



District 22 

Alexander 

Davidson 

Davie 

Iredell 

District Totals 

District 23 

Alleghany 

Ashe 

Wilkes 

Yadkin 

District Totals 

District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 

District Totals 

District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 

District Totals 

District 26 
Mecklenburg 



1,349 
5,083 
1,925 
7,902 

16,259 



696 
1,351 
3,273 
1,840 

7,160 



995 
1,297 

534 
2,067 

879 

5,772 



6,205 
3,651 
8,732 

18,588 
36,968 



680 
3,242 
1,237 
4,847 

10,006 



478 

911 

2,255 

1,293 

4,937 



677 
909 
339 
1,528 
563 

4,016 



3,962 
2,243 
5,600 

11,805 
25,812 



429 

1,197 

20 

1,563 

3,209 



139 
249 
681 
324 

1,393 



114 
226 

126 

309 

42 

817 



1,107 

' 935 

1,712 

3,754 
6,384 



1,109 
4,439 
1,257 
6,410 

13,215 



617 
1,160 
2,936 
1,617 

6,330 



791 
1,135 

465 
1,837 

605 

4,833 



5,069 
3,178 
7,312 

15,559 
32,196 



-Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. 



207 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

September 1, 1986 - June 30, 1987 

Dispositions 



District 27A 



Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 

District Totals 



Total 
Filed 



Gaston 


9,119 


District 27B 




Cleveland 


7,485 


Lincoln 


2,685 


District Totals 


10,170 


District 28 




3uncombe 


8,077 


District 29 





3,147 
2,342 
1,049 
2,755 
1,009 

10,302 



District 


30 




Cherokee 




2,293 


Clay 




394 


Graham 




234 


Haywood 




3,071 


Jackson 




1,397 


Macon 




1,221 


Swain 




1,246 


Distrii 


:t Totals 


9,856 


State Totals 


486,994 



Waiver 

5,625 

4,843 
1,547 

6,390 
6,322 



2,552 
1,741 

865 
2,242 

749 

8,149 



1,729 

271 

150 

2,473 

1,105 

1,516 

944 

8,188 

298,217 



Other 

2,146 

997 
790 

1,787 
1,003 



170 

325 

77 

430 

131 

1,133 



134 
66 
41 
164 
143 
126 
183 

857 

100,436 



Total Dispositions 

7,771 

5,840 
2,337 

8,177 
7,325 



2,722 
2,066 

942 
2,672 

880 

9,282 



1,863 
337 
191 
2,637 
1,248 
1,642 
1,127 

9,045 

398,653 



^Effective September 1, 1986, North Carolina decriminalized a large number of criminal motor vehicle 
offenses; they are now categorized as infractions cases. 



208 



STATE LIBRARY OF NORTH CAROLINA 



3 3091 00748 3076